John Simkin

Peter Ling, Professor of American Studies at the University of Nottingham, has just published a biography of John F. Kennedy. Unlike many biographies of JFK, Ling spends considerable time on the assassination and looks into the reasons why he was murdered. Ling makes use of Sherry P. Fiester’s research to argue that he was killed by more than one gunman. http://www.amazon.co.uk/John-Kennedy-Routledge-Historical-Biographies/dp/0415528860/ref=sr_1_9?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1382780227&sr=1-9&keywords=Peter+Ling

The text of Joan Mellen's talk at the Wecht conference in Pittsburgh last week (October 18, 2013) is now on her website: http://joanmellen.com/wordpress/

I have recently come across a classified MI5 report from 1938 that shows that they were concerned about the activities of Prince George, Duke of Kent. They were following a Nazi agent, Princess Stephanie von Hohenlohe. A report said: "She is frequently summoned by the Führer who appreciates her intelligence and good advice. She is perhaps the only woman who can exercise any influence on him." They also reported that she seemed to be "actively recruiting these British aristocrats in order to promote Nazi sympathies." (PROKV2/1696). According to MI5 the list of people she had been associating with over the last few years included Prince George, the Duke of Windsor, Wallis Simpson, Ethel Snowden, Philip Henry Kerr (Lord Lothian), Geoffrey Dawson, Hugh Grosvenor, 2nd Duke of Westminster, Charles Vane-Tempest-Stewart, 7th Marquess of Londonderry, Ronald Nall-Cain, 2nd Baron Brocket, Lady Maud Cunard and Walter Rothschild, 2nd Baron Rothschild. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Stephanie_von_Hohenlohe.htm

Thank you for that Chris. This is especially relevant to JFK researchers: "According to Alexa, Wikipedia is the sixth most-trafficked website on the Web. It’s the first listing in a Google search for every topic from major corporations to celebrities to all manner of controversial topics. If biased, for-hire authors have infiltrated the encyclopedia to a broader extent, we should all be worried. Wikipedia is the primary source of knowledge on the Internet."

Article at Vice by Martin Robbins: We all know that Wikipedia can be subverted its an inevitability of an open platform that some people will seek to abuse it, whether to gain some advantage or just for a laugh. Fortunately, the Wikipedia community has strong mechanisms in place to deal with this, from the famous cry of [citation needed] to the rigorous checks and standards put in place by its hierarchy of editors and admins. In recent months though, insiders have encountered something altogether more worrying: a concerted attack on the very fabric of Wikipedia by PR companies that have subverted the online encyclopaedias editing hierarchy to alter articles on a massive scale perhaps tens of thousands of them. Wikipedia is the worlds most popular source of cultural, historical and scientific knowledge if their fears are correct, its all-important credibility could be on the line. The king of these Wikipedia reputation managers is a company called Wiki-PR, who specialise in editing Wikipedia on behalf of their paying clients. The promise on their Twitter profile couldnt be clearer: We write it. We manage it. You never worry about Wikipedia again. The services they advertise on their website are a catalogue of behaviours that run completely counter to the principles, rules and etiquette of the Wikipedia community. Under "Page Management" they promise, youll have a dedicated Wikipedia Project Manager that understands your brand as well as you do. That means you need not worry about anyone tarnishing your image be it personal, political, or corporate. Another section focuses on "Crisis Editing": Are you being unfairly treated on Wikipedia? Our Crisis Editing team helps you navigate contentious situations. Well both directly edit your page using our network of established Wikipedia editors and admins. And well engage on Wikipedias back end, so you never have to worry about being libeled on Wikipedia. Companies have attempted to manage their image on Wikipedia before, with mixed results. What sets this apart is the scale of Wiki-PRs ambition, and the depth to which they appear to have penetrated Wikipedias carefully established editing hierarchy. Anyone can edit Wikipedia, but only a carefully vetted few are promoted to admin status on the site. Once in place, they have the ability to "block and unblock user accounts and IP addresses from editing, protect and unprotect pages from editing, delete and undelete pages, rename pages without restriction, and use certain other tools, giving them far greater power than the average user. Some 30-odd thousand people edit Wikipedia every month, but only a thousand or so admins have been created in the last ten years, and their recruitment rate has shrunk over that time. Wiki-PR isnt just claiming to edit Wikipedia, its openly bragging about access to Wikipedias elite.... See the rest of the article here: http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/is-the-pr-industry-buying-influence-over-wikipedia

I have recently doing some research on Princess Stephanie von Hohenlohe. In the 1930s she was a close intimate of Hitler (they were not lovers - Stephanie thought he was homosexual). Although the Gestapo told Hitler that Priness Stephanie was Jewish he continued his relationship with her. Hitler had used Stephanie to get support for his government from the ruling elite in Britain (she was the lover of Lord Rothermere, the main press baron in the 1930s and a strong supporter of Hitler). Anyway, she fled to the United States after the outbreak of war in 1939. She made contact with Drew Pearson and the plan was to publish her memoirs. However, the British establishment was so powerful that her story about Nazis in Britain never appeared. J. Edgar Hoover had her interned and after the war she returned to Germany where she was paid large sums of money to arrange interviews with her many friends. This included John F. Kennedy's first interview with the German media. During this period she still worked with Pearson. One of the interesting things she says about Pearson is that he was always very hostile to Kennedy. Maybe this explains why America's leading investigative journalist in 1963 decided to ignore the assassination and why his assistant, Jack Anderson, and American intelligence plant, was keen to muddy the waters of any investigation into the case. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Stephanie_von_Hohenlohe.htm

Could you send me details of any tweets that you make.

As a result of the article I have been invited to the University of Cambridge to speak on my version of history. Please feel free to follow me on Twitter. If you post on the JFK case I will retweet it and that will give you access to 570 people, including several journalists. https://twitter.com/johnsimkin

In today’s world most people get their information online. This usually means going to Google. Have you tried doing this recently concerning the JFK assassination? You might be doing some great research on the subject but is enough people finding out about it? One organisation that now appears high on any search at Google on the subject is the Mail Online. (It is in fact true of any search). This is because they regularly publish articles on the subject. Unfortunately, it is usually about some crack-pot theory. Mail Online know that people are interested in conspiracy theories so they want to exploit it. At the same time they don’t want any information coming out that undermines the establishment. Why is it that the Mail Online features so highly on search-engine searches? I want to tell you about a media story that I became involved in over the last few days that helps to explain how the new media works. Hopefully, it will give you an insight into how you can fight back against the influence of multinational organisations. Last Saturday the Mail Online ran a story about the historian, Ralph Miliband, the father of Ed Miliband, the leader of the British Labour Party. The article was a complete disgrace and included several inaccuracies. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2435751/Red-Eds-pledge-bring-socialism-homage-Marxist-father-Ralph-Miliband-says-GEOFFREY-LEVY.html At the time, if you typed in at Google, “Ralph Miliband”, my page on him came second to Wikipedia. Therefore, people could have checked out the story via my page on Miliband: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/HISmiliband.htm This happened and the page became the most visited on my website. However, within twenty-four hours the situation changed. Google gives priority to large news organisations in its search results. Within 24 hours, as the story became Britain’s main news story, my page on Miliband disappeared to the fourth page. I decided to fight back against this by using the same techniques as the major news organisations. I therefore wrote an article on my Blog pointing out the inaccuracies and linking the case of Lord Rothermere, the owner of the Daily Mail in the 1930s, with his support of the fascists during this period (Ralph Miliband was a Jewish refugee who arrived in Britain in 1940 from Nazi controlled Europe.) I used information from MI5 and MI6 documents that were declassified in 2005 that showed that Rothermere was paying a retainer of £5,000 per year (£200,000 in today's money) to Princess Stephanie von Hohenlohe, a Nazi spy, and a close confidante of Adolf Hitler. The released documents included documents were several letters from Lord Rothermere to Adolf Hitler. This included, according to a MI6 official "a very indiscreet letter to the Fuhrer congratulating him on his walk into Prague". The letter urged Hitler to follow up his coup with the invasion of Romania. MI5 should have ordered his internment but instead they encouraged Princess Stephanie to flee to the US. They then informed the FBI and she was arrested and interned for the duration of the war. This was a story that the media virtually ignored when the documents were released. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/BUrothermere.htm I then sent out details of the article to over 100 friends and media contacts. I finished the email with the words: “I therefore ask you to pass on this email to friends. It would also help if you “liked” my page on Lord Rothermere and Ralph Miliband and share the article with your friends. Or you could retweet my tweet on the subject.” I was therefore asking my friends to do what the multi-national media organisations do to promote their articles. Most of my friends are not really part of the Twitter generation. However, some of them did what I asked (or got their children or grandchildren to do it). It started slowly until Jimmy Wales received the tweet. He liked the story and retweeted it. Wales has 90,000 followers and it took off. Eventually, one of these tweets reached a journalist working for the Guardian. He contacted me and said he wanted to write an article on me and my website but warned me that the Daily Mail might take revenge on me. However, the whole aim was to get this information out. The article appeared online yesterday. http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2013/oct/04/viscount-rothermere-edmiliband As it was linked from the Guardian home page, it received a large number of visitors. A friend of mine tells me it was the second most visited page on the site. The great advantage was that you can get involved in the discussion that follows the article. As we move towards the anniversary of the assassination, more and more people will be searching for information on the subject. Unless we organize ourselves in the same way that the multinational media organisations do, we will lose the battle for the hearts and minds of the world’s citizens.

I am afraid that I am partly responsible for The Daily Mails outrageous attack on Ralph Miliband on Saturday. The only evidence it provided for its headline: The man who hated Britain comes from my webpage on Miliband. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2435751/Red-Eds-pledge-bring-socialism-homage-Marxist-father-Ralph-Miliband-says-GEOFFREY-LEVY.html In the article Geoffrey Levy quotes from a diary entry that the 16 year old Ralph Miliband wrote in 1940: "The Englishman is a rabid nationalist. They are perhaps the most nationalist people in the world ... When you hear the English talk of this war you sometimes almost want them to lose it to show them how things are. Levy obviously got this information from my webpage on Ralph Miliband. On Saturday, if you typed in Ralph Miliband into Google my site came second after the Wikipedia entry. The Wikipedia page did not have this information on Miliband then (it does now but at least it references my web page). The page is no longer second because the first three pages of search-results for Ralph Miliband at Google are now full-up of news stories about the man. What Levy does not mention is the reason for the diary entry. The Miliband family were Jews living in Belgium who had arrived in May 1940 after fleeing persecution from the Nazis who had recently taken over western Europe. Ralph was shocked by the level of anti-Semitism that existed in England at the time. Ironically, much of this anti-Semitism and dislike of Europeans had come from the propaganda campaign that had taken place in the 1930s. The man behind this campaign was Lord Rothermere, the grandson of the current Lord Rothermere, the owner of The Daily Mail. He has an estimated wealth of £1.02 billion but pays no tax in the UK although he seems that his newspaper is very concerned about all those who are taking too much from the benefit system. The original Lord Rothermere was only Harold Harmsworth until 1919 when he was offered the title in return for his newspapers supporting the Conservative Party. The bribe soon paid dividends and in 1924 the Daily Mail published the Zinoviev Letter a few days before the election took place. This resulted in the fall of the first Labour government. According to Christopher Andrew, the author of Secret Service: The Making of the British Intelligence Community (1985), three MI5 officers with links to the Conservative Party, Sidney Reilly, Arthur Maundy Gregory and George Joseph Ball, had forged the letter. Lord Rotheremere's newspapers continued to increase their circulation. By 1926 the daily sales of the Daily Mail had reached 2,000,000. Rothermere personal wealth was now £25 million and he was estimated to be the third richest man in Britain. Rothermere became increasingly nationalistic in his political views and in 1929 joined with Lord Beaverbrook to form the United Empire Party. Rothermere urged the Conservative Party to remove its leader, Stanley Baldwin, and replace him with Beaverbrook. He also argued for a reform of the House of Lords to make it possible for peers to be elected to the House of Commons. This dispute divided conservative voters and this helped the Labour Party to win the 1929 General Election. In the General Election in Germany that took place in September 1930, the Nazi Party increased its number of representatives in parliament from 14 to 107. Adolf Hitler was now the leader of the second largest party in Germany. James Pool, the author of Who Financed Hitler: The Secret Funding of Hitler's Rise to Power (1979) points out: "Soon after Adolf Hitler Shortly after the Nazis' sweeping victory in the election of September 14, 1930, Rothermere went to Munich to have a long talk with Hitler, and ten days after the election wrote an article discussing the significance of the National Socialists' triumph. The article drew attention throughout England and the Continent because it urged acceptance of the Nazis as a bulwark against Communism... Rothermere continued to say that if it were not for the Nazis, the Communists might have gained the majority in the Reichstag." According to Louis P. Lochner, Tycoons and Tyrant: German Industry from Hitler to Adenauer (1954) Rothermere provided funds to Hitler via Ernst Hanfstaengel. When Hitler became Chancellor on 30th January 1933, Rothermere produced a series of articles acclaiming the new leader of Germany. The most famous of these was on the 10th July when he told readers that he "confidently expected" great things of the Nazi regime. He also criticised other newspapers for "its obsession with Nazi violence and racialism", and assured his readers that any such deeds would be "submerged by the immense benefits that the new regime is already bestowing on Germany." Rothermere now began a campaign in favour of the Nazi Party. The Daily Mail criticized "the old women of both sexes" who filled British newspapers with rabid reports of Nazi "excesses." Instead, the newspaper claimed, Hitler had saved Germany from "Israelites of international attachments" and the "minor misdeeds of individual Nazis will be submerged by the immense benefits that the new regime is already bestowing upon Germany." Rothermere also had several meetings with Adolf Hitler and argued that the Nazi leader desired peace. In one article written in March, 1934 he called for Hitler to be given back land in Africa that had been taken as a result of the Versailles Treaty. Hitler acknowledged this help by writing to Rothermere: "I should like to express the appreciation of countless Germans, who regard me as their spokesman, for the wise and beneficial public support which you have given to a policy that we all hope will contribute to the enduring pacification of Europe. Just as we are fanatically determined to defend ourselves against attack, so do we reject the idea of taking the initiative in bringing about a war. I am convinced that no one who fought in the front trenches during the world war, no matter in what European country, desires another conflict." As Richard Griffiths, the author of Fellow Travellers of the Right (1979) has pointed out: "Rothermere visited Hitler on a number of occasions, and corresponded with him. As we have seen, Hitler's first major dinner party for foreigners, on 19th December 1934, had as its guests of honour Rothermere, his son Esmond Harmsworth, and Ward Price, together with Ernest Tennant. Rothermere's subsequent article in the Daily Mail was violently enthusiastic about what Hitler had done for Germany. Hitler wrote a number of important letters to Rothermere in 1933 and 1934, but the most interesting of them, because of its subsequent fate, was the one written on 3 May 1935 in which he advocated Anglo-German understanding as a firm combination for peace. Rothermere circulated this to many politicians, convinced that his personal contact with Hitler had produced a real breakthrough." Lord Rothermere also gave full support to Oswald Mosley and the National Union of Fascists. He wrote an article, Hurrah for the Blackshirts, on 22nd January, 1934, in which he praised Mosley for his "sound, commonsense, Conservative doctrine". Rothermere added: "Timid alarmists all this week have been whimpering that the rapid growth in numbers of the British Blackshirts is preparing the way for a system of rulership by means of steel whips and concentration camps. Very few of these panic-mongers have any personal knowledge of the countries that are already under Blackshirt government. The notion that a permanent reign of terror exists there has been evolved entirely from their own morbid imaginations, fed by sensational propaganda from opponents of the party now in power. As a purely British organization, the Blackshirts will respect those principles of tolerance which are traditional in British politics. They have no prejudice either of class or race. Their recruits are drawn from all social grades and every political party. Young men may join the British Union of Fascists by writing to the Headquarters, King's Road, Chelsea, London, S.W." The Daily Mail continued to give its support to the fascists. George Ward Price wrote about anti-fascist demonstrators at a meeting of the National Union of Fascists on 8th June, 1934: "If the Blackshirts movement had any need of justification, the Red Hooligans who savagely and systematically tried to wreck Sir Oswald Mosley's huge and magnificently successful meeting at Olympia last night would have supplied it. They got what they deserved. Olympia has been the scene of many assemblies and many great fights, but never had it offered the spectacle of so many fights mixed up with a meeting." In July, 1934 Lord Rothermere suddenly withdrew his support for Oswald Mosley. The historian, James Pool, argues: "The rumour on Fleet Street was that the Daily Mail's Jewish advertisers had threatened to place their adds in a different paper if Rothermere continued the pro-fascist campaign." Pool points out that sometime after this, Rothermere met with Hitler at the Berghof and told how the "Jews cut off his complete revenue from advertising" and compelled him to "toe the line." Hitler later recalled Rothermere telling him that it was "quite impossible at short notice to take any effective countermeasures." Lord Rothermere continued to support Hitler but tried to keep it secret from the general public. It later emerged that Rothermere was paying a retainer of £5,000 per year (£200,000 in today's money) to Princess Stephanie von Hohenlohe, a close confidante of Adolf Hitler, Hermann Goering, Heinrich Himmler and Joachim von Ribbentrop. According to The Daily Telegraph: "In 1933, the year that Hitler gained power, MI6 circulated a report stating that the French secret service had discovered documents in the princess's flat in Paris ordering her to persuade Rothermere to campaign for the return to Germany of territory ceded to Poland at the end of First World War. She was to receive £300,000 equal to £13 million today if she succeeded." Jim Wilson, the author of Nazi Princess: Hitler, Lord Rothermere and Princess Stefanie Von Hohenlohe (2011) has argued: "After arriving in London in 1932, she moved in the most exclusive circles, arranging the visit of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor to Nazi Germany in 1937, and being involved in diplomatic intrigue between Lord Halifax and the Nazis in 1938." By 1938 MI6, was becoming very concerned about her activities. A report said: "She is frequently summoned by the Fuhrer who appreciates her intelligence and good advice. She is perhaps the only woman who can exercise any influence on him." Rothermere and his newspapers supported Neville Chamberlain and his policy of appeasement. When Hitler marched into Czechoslovakia in March 1938 he sent a telegram to Adolf Hitler saying: "My dear Fuhrer everyone in England is profoundly moved by the bloodless solution to the Czechoslovakian problem. People not so much concerned with territorial readjustment as with dread of another war with its accompanying bloodbath. Frederick the Great was a great popular figure. I salute your excellency's star which rises higher and higher." MI6 continued to investigate Stephanie von Hohenlohe. In March 1939 the MI6 passport control officer at Victoria Station arrested her Hungarian lawyer, Erno Wittman. The arresting officer reported what he discovered that Wittman was carrying: "This was astonishing; it appeared to be copies of documents and letters which passed between Lord Rothermere, Lady Snowden, Princess Stephanie, Herr Hitler and others. In the main, the letters referred to the possible restoration of the throne in Hungary and shed a good deal of light on the character and activities of the princess." It was decided to pass on this information to MI5. Amongst the documents were several letters from Lord Rothermere to Adolf Hitler. This included a "a very indiscreet letter to the Fuhrer congratulating him on his walk into Prague". The letter urged Hitler to follow up his coup with the invasion of Romania. On 24th September 1939 Lord Rothermere had his close colleague and "ghost", Collin Brooks, draft a letter to Neville Chamberlain urging the futility of trying to save Poland and warning that "whether victorious or not, Britain will emerge from such a conflict with her social and economic fabric destroyed", which could mean "a revolution of the Left in these islands, which might be more deadly than the war itself". According to Rothermere's biographer, D. George Boyce: "But the letter was never sent (despite Rothermere's fear that Britain was finished), because of the national mood and temper, a nice example of the would-be opinion leader and press baron being led by the public itself." On the outbreak of the war, Stephanie von Hohenlohe, fearing that she would be arrested, fled to San Francisco. Tipped off by MI6, the FBI put her under surveillance. A memo to President Franklin D. Roosevelt described her as a spy "more dangerous than ten thousand men". Lord Rothermere decided to move to Bermuda during the Blitz where he died on 26th November 1940. Much of this information became available in 2005 when MI5 and MI6 released their files on Lord Rothermere. However, the press largely decided to ignore it. According to Alistair Campbell, journalists and politicians are frightened of upsetting the current Lord Rothermere in case he uses the Daily Mail against them. It is time we stood up to these vicious bullies. I therefore ask you to pass on this message to friends. It would also help if you liked my page on Lord Rothermere and Ralph Miliband and shared that with your friends. Or you could retweet my tweets on the subject. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/BUrothermere.htm http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/HISmiliband.htm

Allen Dulles was recruited by the British Security Coordination in 1940. His main role was to provide evidence (most of it manufactured) to persuade President Roosevelt to declare war on Germany. Although William Stephenson was head of the BSC he had nothing to do with Dulles's training. The Office of Strategic Services (OSS) was created by President Roosevelt in July 1942. The OSS replaced the former American intelligence system, Office of the Coordinator of Information (OCI) that was considered to be ineffective. Roosevelt selected Colonel William Donovan as the first director of the organization, who had spent some time studying the Special Operations Executive (SOE), an organization set up by the British government in July 1940. Donovan had served with Stephenson during the First World War and were very close friends. Allen Dulles was recruited to run the New York City office of the OSS. His address was Room 3603, 630 Fifth Avenue. The address of British Security Coordination was Room 3603, 630 Fifth Avenue. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAdullesA.htm

In my opinion, one of the best books published on the assassination. A great tribute to the early pioneers of the investigation.

What do you consider to be the most important information you discovered about the JFK assassination when you were writing the book?

Hank Albarelli has agreed to discuss his book, A Secret Order: Investigating the High Strangeness and Synchronicity in the JFK Assassination, on the Forum.

Jerome Corsi: LBJ Knew About and Supported JFK's Assassination Thursday, September 19, 2013 09:27 AM By: Courtney Coren and Kathleen Walter President Lyndon B. Johnson knew about and supported President John F. Kennedy's assassination, New York Times bestselling author Dr. Jerome Corsi tells Newsmax. As the 50th anniversary of the assassination of President Kennedy approaches, Corsi released his latest book Wednesday, "Who Really Killed Kennedy?" looking at who was really behind the assassination of the president and the veracity of the Warren Commission, who headed up the investigation. "Jack Kennedy was going to replace Lyndon Johnson in [the] 1964 ticket and a major scandal in the Bobby Baker case was about to break in LIFE magazine, which would have ruined Lyndon Johnson's career," Corsi said in an exclusive interview with Newsmax TV. Corsi argues that the assassination was organized at the "highest levels of government" by former Central Intelligence Agency chief Allen Dulles. "One of the major forces behind the assassination was Allen Dulles, who was head of the CIA under President Eisenhower and when Jack Kennedy fired Allen Dulles after the Bay of Pigs fiasco, I think that's when Jack Kennedy signed his death warrant," Corsi says. "Allen Dulles had a revenge motive, was part of this whole new world order . . . Allen Dulles did not take kindly to being fired from the CIA and did not take kindly to Jack Kennedy refusing to commit US military forces in the Bay of Pigs operation. That was a major turning point in the Kennedy administration." Corsi argues that Kennedy did not intend to keep U.S. troops in the Vietnam War and was planning to pull out, which angered many in the CIA and worried several companies that were hoping to profit from the war: "When Jack Kennedy was killed, the CIA had what it wanted, namely the ability to put a president in place who would follow the CIA's script. And we had the Tonkin Gulf incident, a false flag. We went in with Lyndon Johnson to Vietnam. Jack Kennedy was right. The men and women who fought in that war fought very valiantly but it was a war that was never fought to be won and never intended to be won. Yet, millions were made on the war by the companies that participated." Corsi says that "the Warren commission was corrupt," which he argues can be proven by a memo written by assistant attorney general Nicholas Katzenbach saying that "the purpose of the commission was to make sure that the blame was put on Lee Harvey Oswald. The Warren Commission was constituted so the blame did not go to the Soviet Union, did not come back on the CIA, did not name Lyndon Johnson." "The Warren Commission covered up that Lee Harvey Oswald had deep ties [to the] FBI and the intelligence agencies. In November 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald was on the payroll of the FBI. A CIA file had been opened on Lee Harvey Oswald going back to 1957. As part of the fake defectors program, we encouraged military to defect to the Soviet Union really as a double agent, and Lee Harvey Oswald participated in that program," Corsi explains. The New York Times bestselling author says that the ballistic evidence from the assassination is evidence that there was more than one shooter when Kennedy was killed almost 50 years ago on Nov. 22, 1963, saying that there were two wounds, one from the front and one from the back. "So the ballistic evidence as I show in the book is very strong that the shooting included at least one shooter from the front."

Jerome Corsi is now a member. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=20451

Jerome Corsi will be joining the Forum to discuss his book, Who Really Killed Kennedy?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1auxlEc5CU

Very interesting. I will add it to my page on Hugh Aynesworth. That will please him.

John Pilger, The Guardian (10th September, 2013) http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/10/silent-military-coup-took-over-washington On my wall is the Daily Express front page of September 5 1945 and the words: "I write this as a warning to the world." So began Wilfred Burchett's report from Hiroshima. It was the scoop of the century. For his lone, perilous journey that defied the US occupation authorities, Burchett was pilloried, not least by his embedded colleagues. He warned that an act of premeditated mass murder on an epic scale had launched a new era of terror. Almost every day now, he is vindicated. The intrinsic criminality of the atomic bombing is borne out in the US National Archives and by the subsequent decades of militarism camouflaged as democracy. The Syria psychodrama exemplifies this. Yet again we are held hostage by the prospect of a terrorism whose nature and history even the most liberal critics still deny. The great unmentionable is that humanity's most dangerous enemy resides across the Atlantic. John Kerry's farce and Barack Obama's pirouettes are temporary. Russia's peace deal over chemical weapons will, in time, be treated with the contempt that all militarists reserve for diplomacy. With al-Qaida now among its allies, and US-armed coupmasters secure in Cairo, the US intends to crush the last independent states in the Middle East: Syria first, then Iran. "This operation [in Syria]," said the former French foreign minister Roland Dumas in June, "goes way back. It was prepared, pre-conceived and planned." When the public is "psychologically scarred", as the Channel 4 reporter Jonathan Rugman described the British people's overwhelming hostility to an attack on Syria, suppressing the truth is made urgent. Whether or not Bashar al-Assad or the "rebels" used gas in the suburbs of Damascus, it is the US, not Syria, that is the world's most prolific user of these terrible weapons. In 1970 the Senate reported: "The US has dumped on Vietnam a quantity of toxic chemical (dioxin) amounting to six pounds per head of population." This was Operation Hades, later renamed the friendlier Operation Ranch Hand – the source of what Vietnamese doctors call a "cycle of foetal catastrophe". I have seen generations of children with their familiar, monstrous deformities. John Kerry, with his own blood-soaked war record, will remember them. I have seen them in Iraq too, where the US used depleted uranium and white phosphorus, as did the Israelis in Gaza. No Obama "red line" for them. No showdown psychodrama for them. The sterile repetitive debate about whether "we" should "take action" against selected dictators (ie cheer on the US and its acolytes in yet another aerial killing spree) is part of our brainwashing. Richard Falk, professor emeritus of international law and UN special rapporteur on Palestine, describes it as "a self-righteous, one-way, legal/moral screen [with] positive images of western values and innocence portrayed as threatened, validating a campaign of unrestricted political violence". This "is so widely accepted as to be virtually unchallengeable". It is the biggest lie: the product of "liberal realists" in Anglo-American politics, scholarship and media who ordain themselves as the world's crisis managers, rather than the cause of a crisis. Stripping humanity from the study of nations and congealing it with jargon that serves western power designs, they mark "failed", "rogue" or "evil" states for "humanitarian intervention".

I have just heard that Vincent T. Lee died in Berkeley in October, 2012. Richard Gibson is still alive and living in London. According to Paul Hoch the CIA have 700 pages of material on Gibson that they will not release.

I have just heard that Vincent T. Lee died in Berkeley in October, 2012. Richard Gibson is still alive and living in London. According to Paul Hoch the CIA have 700 pages of material on Gibson that they will not release.

Great to see you back James. My all-time favourite poster.

James R. Leavelle was on BBC 4 yesterday attacking those who support conspiracy theories. One of the crazy things he said was that he did not know anyone in Texas who hated JFK and that he was completely surprised by the assassination in Dallas.

The House of Commons last night rejected the government's proposed military strike in Syria. The defeat of a government on foreign policy is extremely rare and usually ends with the prime minister resigning. That will not happen this time but has badly weakened David Cameron. The government claimed it could attack Syria under the UN's "responsibility to protect" doctrine, where people in a foreign state are abused by their own government. There is no way that any military strike would have protected people from future chemical attacks. The use of chemical weapons is terrible and politicians need to find a way of punishing the culprits. But to launch a military attack will only make matters worse. Why has President Obama been so quiet on the napalm attack in Syria earlier this week. Is it because that the United States used such weapons in Vietnam? Does he complain about chemical weapons and not about the use of phosphorous and depleted uranium shells and delayed-action cluster bombs, because he is willing to use those terrible weapons in military conflict? As Simon Jenkins has pointed out: "While Assad seems unlikely to repeat the outrage, the idea that he will roll over if bombed and stop killing his people is naive. As for "degrading" his arsenals, if this releases chemical clouds how stupid is that? The likelihood is now of a single burst of destruction by US forces if only and blood-letting, to assuage the do-something lobby. This can hardly alter the balance in the civil war, though it seems certain to increase the refugee flow, alienate Russia and its regional allies, and infuriate a newly moderate Iran. All this is to 'punish a dictator' in what seems depressingly like a gesture to allow western politicians to strut tall and feel good." What is the mood in the United States? Will a debate and a vote on this issue be taken in Congress?