Jump to content


Spartacus

1964 Jackie Kennedy interviews to be published


  • Please log in to reply
73 replies to this topic

#16 Guest_Robert Morrow_*

Guest_Robert Morrow_*
  • Guests

Posted 08 August 2011 - 10:13 PM

Sounds like Caroline cut the tapes loose and she intends on blowing a hole right through the powder magazine of the USS LBJ Cover-Up, and sinking the entire LBJ corrupt Navy.


http://www.dailymail...eved-death.html


May the confligarations begin and not forget the John Burch Society conspirators that involved General Walker, the Fascist that LHO didn't like, the other Dallas John Burch Fascists that were planning for months to kill JFK. Mercinson was one, Hunt was one, and lots of others like Guy Bannister in New Orleans.


Go Caroline!!!


==========

http://home.roadrunn...ialMystery.html

H.L. Hunt was the local head of the John Birch Society in Dallas and Clint Murchison of the Minutemen, the militant wing of JBS.

If the connection to the JFK assassination could be established, both the John Birch Society and the Minutemen would be branded as terrorist organizations, their members and financiers subject to arrest, their funds and the source of their funds seized. The families affected would include not just Hunt and Murchison, but wealthy elites from coast to coast.

============

It is time to take down all the Crooks.



That is exactly what it is: the USS LBJ Cover Up; except that I think it was sunk 25 years ago with the debris still floating on the water today. Lyndon Johnson took a mortal wounding to his already tattered reputation with the revelations of Billie Sol Estes, Madeleine Brown and Barr McClellan all which originally came out in the 1980's.

Arthur Schlesinger is on record that for a time Robert Kennedy was CONVINCED that Lyndon Johnson was behind the assination of JFK. And if Robert Kennedy was *convinced* about that then it should come as no surprise that Jackie Kennedy, so close to Robert, would think the same way.

What LBJ said to Madeleine Duncan Brown on 12/31/63 at the Driskill Hotel is one of the absolute keys to the JFK assassination: LBJ told her that the Texas oil barons and the CIA murdered JFK. Johnson of course left out his own key role in bringing together the conspirators.

Why do you think Jackie sued William Manchester and demanded that so much of his material be removed from his book? I think a solid guess is that much of the material reflected extremely poorly on Lyndon Johnson and his behavior pre and post assassination. Suspicious, weird, nasty behavior.

Most JFK researchers who interviewed Madeleine Brown 20 or 30 or 40 times (James Fetzer, Ed Tatro, Casey Quindlan would be 3 solid examples) are convinced that she is quite an important and credible witness to truth. I agree, with the disclaimer I don't believe *everything* she says. But basically very close to LBJ, knew his mood and the inside story, and was dead right about a lot of stuff (including the pregnant former secretary of LBJ now thought to be Mary Margaret Wiley; that is insider LBJ knowledge.)

I agree we do need to hear exactly what Jackie said on those tapes. I sure hope that Caroline Kennedy releases them in unedited form. They must be blockbuster if took them 48 years to release them.

There are 2 things the really look for in these tapes: did Jackie really say she thought that the 1) Vietnam War and 2) government oil policies were factors in the JFK assassination. Remember, this is early 1964, long before the major escalation into Vietnam which began summer 1965 (if I am correct). If Jackie is talking Vietnam - wow - she must have been privvy to a lot the behind the scenes policy battles over Vietnam.

Ditto government oil policies. There were a lot of folks in Texas (and else) who had a lot to lose if their advocate Lyndon Johnson were to be politically executed the Kennedys (which is precisely what was happening the weeks preceding 11/22/63) ... or rather these same folks Murchison, Hunt, DH Byrd, perhaps even the Rockefellers, had a lot to GAIN if John Kennedy were to be murdered and replaced by their lackey Lyndon Johnson.

Edited by Robert Morrow, 08 August 2011 - 10:18 PM.


#17 Jim Phelps

Jim Phelps

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 884 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Knoxville, near Oak Ridge
  • Interests:Low Energy Nuclear Reactions--Cold Fusion
    JFK Assassination Science
    Ham Radio
    Atmospheric Sciences
    Essene Religion Studies
    http://www.doewatch.com/jfk
    The Judyth Baker Story--Deeper Insights
    http://www.doewatch.com/jb
    The JFK: Perfect Murder Solved--Ultimate Edition:
    http://www.doewatch.com/jfk
    The JFK Forum's Foreign Agents:
    http://www.doewatch.com/jfkforeignagent
    The NAZI Phoenix that rose from Hitler's Germany ashes of WWII to Kill an America President:
    http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread784763/pg1

    The Ring Leaders on the JFK assassination in Dallas were the Birchers. HL Hunt and General Walker
    The JFK assassination was more than just a domestic plot, it had Foreign Elements in the Murder.

    "Live Long and Prosper": Be sure to include abundant Boron minerals in your diet.

Posted 08 August 2011 - 11:07 PM

Just keep in mind the John Burch Society was the Dallas Glue that ties them all together with New Orleans and LHO's boss "Banister the Burcher", then Clay Shaw and Nagy, then Bloomfield.

Edited by Jim Phelps, 08 August 2011 - 11:08 PM.


#18 Myra Bronstein

Myra Bronstein

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,895 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:USA

Posted 09 August 2011 - 01:47 AM

Before Ted Kennedy's book came out there were all sorts of erroneous reports about the contents. So I'll wait for the real thing. Though I don't believe any part of the mainstream media would cooperate if any actual light were shed on the case.

Either way it's a big event to hear directly from Jackie. I hope Caroline serves her family well.

#19 Kathleen Collins

Kathleen Collins

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,818 posts

Posted 09 August 2011 - 04:39 AM

Jackie Kennedy believed, CORRECTLY, that it was Lyndon Johnson and his Texas oil men who were behind the JFK assassination. Bingo! And that the Vietnam war and favorable tax treatments for oil companies were big reasons in the JFK assassination. Bingo! And no doubt she knew that LBJ was going to be dropped from the 1964 ticket and that LBJ was highly threatened by this. Bingo!

"On the assassination, a second source said Jackie believed gunman Lee Harvey Oswald was "part of a much larger conspiracy." She became convinced that Vice-President Lyndon Johnson, JFK's successor, and a cabal of Texas tycoons were involved.
"Those businessmen expected that LBJ would give them more favourable treatment in Vietnam War contracts and oil policies.
"There is no doubt that Jackie wanted the truth to come out, but feared that she and her children, Caroline and John Jr, might also be marked for death by the ¬conspirators."

This is very significant. We now know that 2 of the closest women to John Kennedy: his wife Jackie Kennedy and his longtime secretary Evelyn Lincoln BOTH believed that Lyndon Johnson was behind the JFK assassination.

Arthur Schlesinger has stated that for a time Robert Kennedy (very, very close to Jackie) also believed that Johnson was behind the JFK assassination.

And it is well known that one of the closest women to Lyndon Johnson, Madeleine Duncan Brown, his long time mistress who he had a son Steven with in 1950, Madeleine Brown ALSO thought that Texas oil men were behind the JFK assassination and that Lyndon Johnson was a willing accomplice.

Folks, you need to listen! The evidence of Johnson's guilt just keeps piling up.

For the new readers here, please google "LBJ-CIA Assassination of JFK". You can also email me at Morrow321@aol.com and I will give you my entire files on the LBJ-CIA assassination of JFK.


If Jackie believed LBJ had killed her husband, how does that explain the way she speaks to LBJ on the phone about 10 days after the Assassination? First she sounds like a little girl because he sent her something and she's thanking him. Then he starts talking flirtatiously with her and Jackie responds in the same manner.

If she harbored any thought that LBJ was behind it, how does that explain her reaction to LBJ on the phone?

Link: http://whitehousetap...queline-kennedy

Kathy C

Edited by Kathleen Collins, 10 August 2011 - 03:33 AM.


#20 Bernice Moore

Bernice Moore

    Super Member

  • JFK
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,957 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Canada

Posted 09 August 2011 - 05:12 AM


Jackie Kennedy believed, CORRECTLY, that it was Lyndon Johnson and his Texas oil men who were behind the JFK assassination. Bingo! And that the Vietnam war and favorable tax treatments for oil companies were big reasons in the JFK assassination. Bingo! And no doubt she knew that LBJ was going to be dropped from the 1964 ticket and that LBJ was highly threatened by this. Bingo!

"On the assassination, a second source said Jackie believed gunman Lee Harvey Oswald was "part of a much larger conspiracy." She became convinced that Vice-President Lyndon Johnson, JFK's successor, and a cabal of Texas tycoons were involved.
"Those businessmen expected that LBJ would give them more favourable treatment in Vietnam War contracts and oil policies.
"There is no doubt that Jackie wanted the truth to come out, but feared that she and her children, Caroline and John Jr, might also be marked for death by the ¬conspirators."

This is very significant. We now know that 2 of the closest women to John Kennedy: his wife Jackie Kennedy and his longtime secretary Evelyn Lincoln BOTH believed that Lyndon Johnson was behind the JFK assassination.

Arthur Schlesinger has stated that for a time Robert Kennedy (very, very close to Jackie) also believed that Johnson was behind the JFK assassination.

And it is well known that one of the closest women to Lyndon Johnson, Madeleine Duncan Brown, his long time mistress who he had a son Steven with in 1950, Madeleine Brown ALSO thought that Texas oil men were behind the JFK assassination and that Lyndon Johnson was a willing accomplice.

Folks, you need to listen! The evidence of Johnson's guilt just keeps piling up.

For the new readers here, please google "LBJ-CIA Assassination of JFK". You can also email me at Morrow321@aol.com and I will give you my entire files on the LBJ-CIA assassination of JFK.


If Jackie believed LBJ had killed her husband, how does that explain the way she speaks to LBJ on the phone about 10 days after the Assassination? First she sounds like a little girl because he sent her something and she's thanking him. Then he starts talking flirtatiously with her and Jackie responds in the same manner.

If she harbored any thought that LBJ was behind it, how does that explain her reaction to LBJ on the phone?

Link:http://whitehousetapes.net/clip/lyndon-johnson-jacqueline-kennedy-lbj-and-jacqueline-kennedy

Kathy C


Hi KATHY; It is being reported now by abc that the original posting of that info was done and then picked up from a forum type site, and took off from there, this is about the latest, i am sure there will be much more coming.I'm waiting till I hear them like many others, and see a transcript, after the show, nothing is ever as whoop ti do, in all this as we are usually led to believe, anything for a head line with some, just wait for a bit longer they are to come out in SEPT.....take care b

http://www.bellingha...-tapes-not.html

Aug, 8, 2011
Secret Jackie Kennedy tapes not as sordid as reported, ABC says

By DEBORAH NETBURN / Los Angeles Times
LOS ANGELES -- The British newspaper the Daily Mail recently posted a story on its website claiming to have inside information on the secret tapes Jackie Kennedy made with historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr. just months after her husband's death.

According to the Mail story, the tapes are filled with sordid information - including tales of the president's affair with a 19-year-old intern, Jackie Kennedy's belief that Lyndon Johnson and a cartel of Texas businessmen were responsible for John F. Kennedy's assassination, and stories of her own affair with the movie star William Holden.

The story quickly made the rounds of the Internet, but ABC, the network that actually has the tapes, dismissed the Mail's claims as bogus.

"The tabloid reports about the content of the tapes are totally erroneous," a spokesperson from ABC said in a statement. "ABC News isn't releasing any content from those tapes until mid-September, at which point it will be clear how off base these reports are."

The Mail updated the original story to include ABC's response, but did not remove the original story from its site.

Jackie Kennedy had requested that the tapes, which total eight hours and were made just four months after her husband was killed, not be released until 50 years after her death. But her daughter, Caroline Kennedy, agreed to let ABC have access to the tapes now - just 17 years after her mother's death. The network is putting together a "20/20" special with Diane Sawyer in which Americans will get to hear the tapes for the first time. It's scheduled to air in September.

The special will coincide with the release of a new book based partly on the tapes: "Jacqueline Kennedy: Historic Conversations on Life with John F. Kennedy." It has a forward by Caroline Kennedy and annotations by historian Michael Beschloss.

"It is a great privilege to be able to share these recollections with the millions of people who admire my parents. My mother took very seriously the obligation to preserve and document the history of my father's administration - and these interviews are the result. I am honored to play a small part in that effort by bringing them forward in connection with the 50th anniversary of the Kennedy administration," Caroline Kennedy told ABC News.

Edited by Bernice Moore, 09 August 2011 - 05:19 AM.


#21 William Kelly

William Kelly

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9,161 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 August 2011 - 06:01 AM

If Beschloss is the editor and making the notes, that is a bad sign.

As DOn Gibson showed, Beschloss did some real tampering in his two Taking Charge books about Johnson.


From what I understand Beschloss was pretty grossed out by what he learned about LBJ, and he didn't even get to the assassination yet.

BK

#22 Don Jeffries

Don Jeffries

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,121 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Writing fiction and nonfiction. My first published work, the 2007 sci-fi/fantasy novel "The Unreals," has been acclaimed by the likes of "Night at the Museum" screenwriter and "Reno 911" actor Robert Ben Garant and multi-award winning author and former Harvard Professor Alexander Theroux. A second edition is in the works. My nonfiction book "Hidden History: An Expose of Modern Crimes, Conspiracies, and Cover-Ups in American Politics," was released in November 2014 by Skyhorse Publishing.

Posted 09 August 2011 - 06:05 AM

This goes against everything we know about Caroline Kennedy's personality. It certainly isn't like her to disclose any private matters even one second before she would be legally obligated to. But who knows- maybe she's really ticked off about the hatchet job the msm did on her, which raliroaded her appointment to the U.S. Senate. Perhaps she's finally going to become a profile in courage.

Whatever turns out to be in those tapes, I just can't envision a prime time television program, hosted by Dianne Sawyer, in which we get to hear Jackie Kennedy say Oswald was a patsy, and to accuse LBJ and others of being behind a conspiracy to assassinate JFK. If anything remotely like that is broadcast, it will be absolutely stunning and will have a real impact on the public.

#23 William Kelly

William Kelly

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9,161 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 August 2011 - 06:23 AM



If Beschloss is the editor and making the notes, that is a bad sign.

As DOn Gibson showed, Beschloss did some real tampering in his two Taking Charge books about Johnson.


From what I understand Beschloss was pretty grossed out by what he learned about LBJ, and he didn't even get to the assassination yet.

BK


I don't understand what this means.

His two books on LBJ's phone calls go way into 1965. Which is beyond the assassination.

I think you are thinking of Caro.


Yes, thank you James.

It's hard for me to read anything about LBJ.

#24 David Andrews

David Andrews

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,649 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 August 2011 - 01:50 PM

If Jackie believed LBJ had killed her husband, how does that explain the way she speaks to LBJ on the phone about 10 days after the Assassination?...If she harbored any thought that LBJ was behind it, how does that explain her reaction to LBJ on the phone?

I'm betting that Bobby was in the room when she made that call (or that he otherwise encouraged it), and it was some kind of put-up job on Johnson. There's something stagey and overblown about Jackie's side of that conversation.

Edited by David Andrews, 09 August 2011 - 06:58 PM.


#25 Guest_Robert Morrow_*

Guest_Robert Morrow_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 August 2011 - 03:56 PM


Jackie Kennedy believed, CORRECTLY, that it was Lyndon Johnson and his Texas oil men who were behind the JFK assassination. Bingo! And that the Vietnam war and favorable tax treatments for oil companies were big reasons in the JFK assassination. Bingo! And no doubt she knew that LBJ was going to be dropped from the 1964 ticket and that LBJ was highly threatened by this. Bingo!

"On the assassination, a second source said Jackie believed gunman Lee Harvey Oswald was "part of a much larger conspiracy." She became convinced that Vice-President Lyndon Johnson, JFK's successor, and a cabal of Texas tycoons were involved.
"Those businessmen expected that LBJ would give them more favourable treatment in Vietnam War contracts and oil policies.
"There is no doubt that Jackie wanted the truth to come out, but feared that she and her children, Caroline and John Jr, might also be marked for death by the ¨conspirators."

This is very significant. We now know that 2 of the closest women to John Kennedy: his wife Jackie Kennedy and his longtime secretary Evelyn Lincoln BOTH believed that Lyndon Johnson was behind the JFK assassination.

Arthur Schlesinger has stated that for a time Robert Kennedy (very, very close to Jackie) also believed that Johnson was behind the JFK assassination.

And it is well known that one of the closest women to Lyndon Johnson, Madeleine Duncan Brown, his long time mistress who he had a son Steven with in 1950, Madeleine Brown ALSO thought that Texas oil men were behind the JFK assassination and that Lyndon Johnson was a willing accomplice.

Folks, you need to listen! The evidence of Johnson's guilt just keeps piling up.

For the new readers here, please google "LBJ-CIA Assassination of JFK". You can also email me at Morrow321@aol.com and I will give you my entire files on the LBJ-CIA assassination of JFK.


If Jackie believed LBJ had killed her husband, how does that explain the way she speaks to LBJ on the phone about 10 days after the Assassination? First she sounds like a little girl because he sent her something and she's thanking him. Then he starts talking flirtatiously with her and Jackie responds in the same manner.

If she harbored any thought that LBJ was behind it, how does that explain her reaction to LBJ on the phone?

Link:http://whitehousetapes.net/clip/lyndon-johnson-jacqueline-kennedy-lbj-and-jacqueline-kennedy

Kathy C



Kathy C, people "play act" all the time to get what they want. Lyndon Johnson, pathological liar and full blown psychopath, would "play act" all the time - it was second nature to him.

Jackie would "play act" too, especially in her dealings with Johnson, who she detested, after the JFK assassination. Maybe she did not want to get killed. Maybe post assassination she had some leverage as the "grieving widow" and might could get certain things out of LBJ.

For example on 7-4-64 Bobby Kennedy had Jackie call LBJ on the 4th of July as an indirect way of getting him to put RFK on the 1964 Democratic ticket. Johnson and his people were highly offended by this manipulation by RFK.

Of course, imho, Lyndon Johnson had just played a key role in murdering JFK.

Then there is the *play acting* with Rose Kennedy and LBJ as LBJ calls her from Air Force One to gives his condolences. Remember, LBJ is a psycopath, the kind of guy who can kill your husband, then go to the funeral weeping. Rose Kennedy *play acts* too saying stuff like JFK "loved you" (meaning the hated Johnson who the Kennedy brothers had just spent the fall 1963 trying to politically execute).

It is really sad today when people, not knowing context, will listen to a tape of LBJ and Hoover talking and take it at face value and not know both are *play acting* because both know (or assume) the conversation is being recorded. LBJ is *play acting* constantly on those tapes, such as when he asks Hoover were they shooting at me. Complete nonsense.

LBJ, Hoover, CIA and the Texas oil men knew WHO was being shot at ... and who was arranging the shooting. Remember Hoover leaves work at 5PM on 11/22/63, the day of the assassination, and then on Saturday, after talking with LBJ in the morning, spends the afternoon at the horse racetrack with his boyfriend/lover/assistant Clyde Tolson.

Taken together, those 2 things are almost prima facie evidence of Hoover's participation in or foreknowledge of the JFK assassination.

*Play acting* - it is best to assume it is going on all the time in those tape recordings.

#26 John Simkin

John Simkin

    Super Member

  • admin
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 16,119 posts

Posted 09 August 2011 - 04:02 PM

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view/20110809secret_jackie_kennedy_tapes_not_as_sordid_as_reported_abc_says/

The British newspaper the Daily Mail recently posted a story on its website claiming to have inside information on the secret tapes Jackie Kennedy made with historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr. just months after her husbandís death.

According to the Mail story, the tapes are filled with sordid information ó including tales of the presidentís affair with a 19-year-old intern, Jackie Kennedyís belief that Lyndon Johnson and a cartel of Texas businessmen were responsible for John F. Kennedyís assassination, and stories of her own affair with the movie star William Holden.

The story quickly made the rounds of the Internet, but ABC, the network that actually has the tapes, dismissed the Mailís claims as bogus.

"The tabloid reports about the content of the tapes are totally erroneous," a spokesperson from ABC said in a statement. "ABC News isnít releasing any content from those tapes until mid-September, at which point it will be clear how off base these reports are."

The Mail updated the original story to include ABCís response, but did not remove the original story from its site.

Jackie Kennedy had requested that the tapes, which total eight hours and were made just four months after her husband was killed, not be released until 50 years after her death. But her daughter, Caroline Kennedy, agreed to let ABC have access to the tapes now ó just 17 years after her motherís death. The network is putting together a "20/20" special with Diane Sawyer in which Americans will get to hear the tapes for the first time. Itís scheduled to air in September.

The special will coincide with the release of a new book based partly on the tapes: "Jacqueline Kennedy: Historic Conversations on Life with John F. Kennedy." It has a forward by Caroline Kennedy and annotations by historian Michael Beschloss.

"It is a great privilege to be able to share these recollections with the millions of people who admire my parents. My mother took very seriously the obligation to preserve and document the history of my fatherís administration ó and these interviews are the result. I am honored to play a small part in that effort by bringing them forward in connection with the 50th anniversary of the Kennedy administration," Caroline Kennedy told ABC News.


#27 Guest_Robert Morrow_*

Guest_Robert Morrow_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 August 2011 - 04:03 PM

If Beschloss is the editor and making the notes, that is a bad sign.

As DOn Gibson showed, Beschloss did some real tampering in his two Taking Charge books about Johnson.


Michael Beschloss = CFR and that is a huge red flag in and of itself.

After that ABC press release, I am coming around to the belief that even in 2011, there is no way that ABC is going to put on national TV Jackie Kennedy talking about her adulterous love affairs AND her belief that LBJ killed JFK.

I have little doubt that Jackie indeed thought LBJ killed JFK.

But I severely doubt that ABC will put that stuff on the air, even if it is true and even if it is in the tapes.

One red flag about that British article is Jackie talking about Vietnam. Vietnam had not escalated in early 1964, so Jackie would have to have some real insider knowledge to be talking that way at that time. The Vietnam stuff makes me suspicious of that British article and makes me now think that we have a false alert here.

Caroline Kennedy should post online the entire raw, uneditited tapes of Jackie's interviews.

Edited by Robert Morrow, 09 August 2011 - 04:05 PM.


#28 Bernice Moore

Bernice Moore

    Super Member

  • JFK
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,957 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Canada

Posted 09 August 2011 - 09:05 PM

someone had asked. i believe, if abc actually had the tapes, according to this info, yes they do..b


http://news.bostonhe....rted_abc_says/

The story quickly made the rounds of the Internet, but ABC, the
network that actually has the tapes, dismissed the Mailís claims as
bogus .........

#29 Kathleen Collins

Kathleen Collins

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,818 posts

Posted 09 August 2011 - 11:03 PM

I actually don't understand what all this hub bub is based upon.

To me this would be a big story for say Ladies HOme Journal, or say the National Enquirer.

But what makes it important to us?

I mean unless we know why she thought what she did, then how is this important or influential?

I mean the fact that Talbot showed that RFK thought his brother was killed by a conspiracy is key for two reasons:

1. The argument had been that if he thought it was a plot, then why did he not say anything.

2. This knowledge may have been why RFK was killed. Because when he became president, he would have opened the case again.

I don't see how this applies here. Jackie may have thought some Texas people did it. OK.

Unless she based this on something tangible, I don't see the value in it. Except for the celebrity involved.


Please don't trivialize Jackie Kennedy. She was married to the man for 10 years. I'm sure she heard a lot of things. She might drop a bomb. Originally, those tapes were not going to be made public until her last child died. So something's on them. Would she admit to the knowledge that President Kennedy may have planned to assassinate Castro on Dec. 2, 1963, as was published in 2 books? Probably not, but let's not judge her as though she was an unthinking, unimportant woman. And I personally don't see Kennedy killing Castro (whose been dead now for years, like Usama bin Laden).

What I don't understand is that phone conversation with LBJ. She called him 10 days after the Assassination and sounded like a little girl. Her voice became deeper as the 2 flirted. How can you talk like that to the man whom you believe might have killed your husband and left your children without a father? Saying, "That's how they'll remember me" -- 'she ran around with 2 Presidents.'"

Kathy C

#30 Michael Hogan

Michael Hogan

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,468 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 August 2011 - 11:10 PM

This goes against everything we know about Caroline Kennedy's personality. It certainly isn't like her to disclose any private matters even one second before she would be legally obligated to.
But who knows- maybe she's really ticked off about the hatchet job the msm did on her, which railroaded her appointment to the U.S. Senate. Perhaps she's finally going to become a profile in courage.

Whatever turns out to be in those tapes, I just can't envision a prime time television program, hosted by Dianne Sawyer, in which we get to hear Jackie Kennedy say Oswald was a patsy, and to accuse LBJ and others of being behind a conspiracy to assassinate JFK. If anything remotely like that is broadcast, it will be absolutely stunning and will have a real impact on the public.


Don Jeffries has a knack for breaking things down to a simple and logical format. While adding the standard caveat "I may not agree with everything he writes," the fact is I usually do.
I consider Don to generally be an outstanding voice of reason.

The red flags Don alludes to were there in the beginning. Even the tabloid that broke the story could only cite a "second source." Caroline Kennedy made her statement about the tapes back in March of this year.
The Amazon website makes no reference to anything remotely resembling Mrs. Kennedy's alleged suspicions about Oswald or LBJ. There are a myriad of other reasons to suspect the original article was bogus
in the way it referred to Mrs. Kennedy's alleged revelations.

One member who has repeatedly urged people to read David Talbot's Brothers, meanwhile showing signs that he had not read it himself, was quick to holler bingo and tell people they need to listen.
David Talbot delved deep into the story of the surviving Kennedy family and he never offered this unsubstantiated speculation about Mrs Kennedy suspecting that Johnson was behind a conspiracy.
That same member accepts the part of Talbot's research they want to take out of context, and rejects the rest that does not support their theories.

Even though David Talbot wrote extensively and intimately about the Kennedy family's reactions to the President's murder, he never reported that Schlesinger stated that for a time Robert Kennedy
believed Johnson was behind the assassination. Why? The answer is if it were a fact, or even a strong likelihood, it would have been featured in his book for sure.

I suppose if one tells us that Madeleine Brown's Driskill story is the number one evidence of conspiracy in this case and yet admits that they don't believe everything she said, they will be
quick to accept anything that supports their beliefs, regardless of the provenance.

Ever since President Kennedy's murder, there has been a spate of articles, manuscripts and books. Some were sensational at the time, but the ensuing years demonstrated their shortcomings.
Still, some people still embrace such works as Nomenclature of an Assassination Cabal and Farewell America as definitive. There are many more examples, of course. Anyone can take a passage
here, a passage there and come up with any kind of theory they want to. How many times have you read on this forum someone's big picture theory that has been a conglomeration of snippets
they gathered from the internet? Then they expect you to arrive at the same conclusions they did.

Speaking of the internet, when this tabloid story broke about Jacqueline Kennedy suspecting Oswald was part of a larger conspiracy that involved LBJ and other fantastic things, it quickly
went mildly viral. It was remarkable how many websites repeated the claims as if they were fact, sneaking in the obligatory "according to."

It became up to a spokesman from ABC to comment on the rumors. However, for anyone that took five minutes to fact check, Caroline Kennedy's statements about the tape were out months ago.
In light of that statement, who would believe that she traded the tapes so that the Kennedy mini-series would not air (even though it eventually did)? Or that she made the decision to
trade access to the tapes that revealed her mother's admission of revenge affairs while announcing that decision this way:

"It is a great privilege to be able to share these recollections with the millions of people who admire my parents. My mother took very seriously the obligation to preserve and document the history of my
father's administration - and these interviews are the result. I am honored to play a small part in that effort by bringing them forward in connection with the 50th anniversary of the Kennedy administration."

The tapes have remained secret for forty-seven years. If Caroline Kennedy made a decision to release tapes that publicized the affairs her parents had, what motivation was there for her to release them now?

It just strains the most basic sense of credulity.

Twenty years from now some people will still be claiming that Jacqueline Kennedy admitted to a listening Schlesinger that she had numerous high-profile affairs and that Johnson was involved with Texas oilmen in the
conspiracy to kill her husband. They will also claim that the major media and the Kennedy family covered it up in 1964 and the Kennedy family covered it up again in 2011. Those will likely be some of the same people
that bought this story hook, line and sinker when the tabloid story first came out. The fact that they are backing off now, but only ever so slightly, doesn't excuse their initial gullibility should these tapes disappoint them.

I'm willing to wait until the tapes are released in less than a month. In the meantime, Jim DiEugenio expressed it about as succinctly as one can:

I thought that report was BS when I read it. But that is the British tabloid scene.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users