Jump to content
The Education Forum
Sign in to follow this  
A.J. Weberman

John Judge

Recommended Posts

This guy is not what he claims to be. I believe he is some sort of act like Fensterwald was. He claimed I worked for LaRouche which is a cop line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This guy is not what he claims to be. I believe he is some sort of act like Fensterwald was. He claimed I worked for LaRouche which is a cop line.

Hi A.J.,

When I first met John Judge at University of Dayton in 1970 he called my attention to Jim Garrison's Playboy interview. Later on he let me read a very early edition of your book Coup d'etat in America that you did with Mike Canfield - what happened to him?

Back then Judge talked about you as he did about his other friends of that era - Mae Brussell, Penn Jones, Paul Krassner, Ken Kesey et al., and then introduced me to them.

The copy of your book that he had was an early hardback proof edition without the bindings, and it impressed me enough to dive in and become an assassination researcher. After the HSCA folded, Judge and I co-found the Committee for an Open Archives - to free the assassination records, and later COPA. John was secretary of COPA and is now director, and as the COPA gatekeeper he has made many enemies keeping out the riff-raff, fakers and disinformation agents.

Judge only had good things to say about you to me.

Judge also has a similar opinion about Fensterwald, who he never trusted, and he's never mentioned you and LaRouche in the same breath to me, and if he did think that he now stands corrected.

Bill Kelly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This guy is not what he claims to be. I believe he is some sort of act like Fensterwald was. He claimed I worked for LaRouche which is a cop line.

Hi A.J.,

When I first met John Judge at University of Dayton in 1970 he called my attention to Jim Garrison's Playboy interview. Later on he let me read a very early edition of your book Coup d'etat in America that you did with Mike Canfield - what happened to him?

Back then Judge talked about you as he did about his other friends of that era - Mae Brussell, Penn Jones, Paul Krassner, Ken Kesey et al., and then introduced me to them.

The copy of your book that he had was an early hardback proof edition without the bindings, and it impressed me enough to dive in and become an assassination researcher. After the HSCA folded, Judge and I co-found the Committee for an Open Archives - to free the assassination records, and later COPA. John was secretary of COPA and is now director, and as the COPA gatekeeper he has made many enemies keeping out the riff-raff, fakers and disinformation agents.

Judge only had good things to say about you to me.

Judge also has a similar opinion about Fensterwald, who he never trusted, and he's never mentioned you and LaRouche in the same breath to me, and if he did think that he now stands corrected.

Bill Kelly

Having attended a few of the COPA conferences, and having appeared at one, I can confirm that no one is more active in keeping the investigations of the assassinations alive than John Judge, and no one is more convinced Kennedy was killed by a right-wing/military/CIA coup.

Perhaps A.J.'s comment was designed to be ironic, and a comment on the Lifton/Fetzer fall-out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This guy is not what he claims to be. I believe he is some sort of act like Fensterwald was. He claimed I worked for LaRouche which is a cop line.

Hi A.J.,

When I first met John Judge at University of Dayton in 1970 he called my attention to Jim Garrison's Playboy interview. Later on he let me read a very early edition of your book Coup d'etat in America that you did with Mike Canfield - what happened to him?

Back then Judge talked about you as he did about his other friends of that era - Mae Brussell, Penn Jones, Paul Krassner, Ken Kesey et al., and then introduced me to them.

The copy of your book that he had was an early hardback proof edition without the bindings, and it impressed me enough to dive in and become an assassination researcher. After the HSCA folded, Judge and I co-found the Committee for an Open Archives - to free the assassination records, and later COPA. John was secretary of COPA and is now director, and as the COPA gatekeeper he has made many enemies keeping out the riff-raff, fakers and disinformation agents.

Judge only had good things to say about you to me.

Judge also has a similar opinion about Fensterwald, who he never trusted, and he's never mentioned you and LaRouche in the same breath to me, and if he did think that he now stands corrected.

Bill Kelly

Having attended a few of the COPA conferences, and having appeared at one, I can confirm that no one is more active in keeping the investigations of the assassinations alive than John Judge, and no one is more convinced Kennedy was killed by a right-wing/military/CIA coup.

Perhaps A.J.'s comment was designed to be ironic, and a comment on the Lifton/Fetzer fall-out.

I agree with Pat about John Judge. I am convinced he is on the level. But like so many of the Jewish JFK researchers,

he is often misinterpreted. When you consider the large number of Jewish JFK researchers, their motivations are

often held up to suspicion. I would list them (from Lane and Weisberg onward, but most of you know all of them).

As for me, I think all of them were motivated by strong feelings of INJUSTICE, with which they were well acquainted.

Perhaps the most vocal of them all was Mae Brussell, whose hate of Nazis led her to fight other injustices. John Judge

is one of Mae's disciples.

Jack

Edited by Jack White

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another unnecessary feud. AJ, I admire you, and am very happy to see you on the forum. I loved reading your book many years ago. I also shared your keen interest in Bob Dylan. John Judge has done great work with COPA- I don't see anything to indicate he's not completely sincere.

We don't need to hold hands and sing together, but we ought to be able to understand that our common bond- wanting to expose the lies about the official JFK assassination thesis- is much stronger than our individual differences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Another unnecessary feud. AJ, I admire you, and am very happy to see you on the forum. I loved reading your book many years ago. I also shared your keen interest in Bob Dylan. John Judge has done great work with COPA- I don't see anything to indicate he's not completely sincere.

We don't need to hold hands and sing together, but we ought to be able to understand that our common bond- wanting to expose the lies about the official JFK assassination thesis- is much stronger than our individual differences.

I asked John Judge what the beef was with A.J. and he said he didn't know. He denied saying anything about LaRouche, and the last time Judge recalls meeting was at the Village Gate when he gave a talk on the Reagan shooting and A.J. complained Judge drew "too big a picture."

So we all make our own decisions as to what is important and evaluate each other's work and judge everyone according to how we find them. So be it.

COPA is a big organization of diverse people, but some didn't like it, like GME and Debra Conway and they went out and formed Lancer, and others, like JB, after giving one talk, lashed out against it as being infiltrated by the likes of Sarah McClendon.

Anyone really interested in what John Judge and COPA are all about should ask John Geraghty, who as an Irish student joined COPA and then spent two summers as an intern in DC working closely with John and knows pretty much everything.

Apparently we can't succeed alone, and we can't work together.

BK

Edited by William Kelly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have attended some of the recent COPAs in Dallas (I think four of the past six). John Judge has always impressed me as someone who is sincerely seeking the truth regarding the murders of JFK, RFK, MLK, and Malcolm X.

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

American UniversitySymposium on Film and Politics – 1992?

Dan Moldier: "….said he was directly involved in the president's murder. Now last week we have Frank Ragano, the attorney for both Jimmy Hoffa and Santo Traficante flat out said that it was Jimmy Hoffa, SantoTranficante and Carlos Marcello who arranged and executed the assassination ofthe President of the United States and that he wishes to testify, under oath,before the appropriate congressional committee, in order to get the truth out after all of these years. What we are suggesting is, lets get Ragano before a committee, let's get him deposed, let's get what his story is and let the evidence go where ever it goes. Oliver Stone speaks in theories and premesis.The people who are advocating that organized crime should be the principal target of the investigation are speaking from facts and specific credible evidence.

John Judge, you favor opening the archives. I wonder whether you have any preliminary hypothesis if the archives were opened?

John Judge: I think more important than what specifically remains in the archives, Norman Mailer compared it to a Mercedez Benz that'sbeen left in Harlem for twenty years, in terms of what we might find. But we do have lists of what's been put in, so at least we can compare them to what comes out, but I think what's more important is the principle that this is public information and it belongs to us, the people of the United States, and not to any secret government or intelligence network or any president or Congress who are merely hired by us to do our bidding anyway.

[Applause]

Thomas Jefferson said that given a choice between a government with no newspaper or a newspaper with no government, he would always choose the latter. Of course he never had the chance of reading the Washington Post or New York Times, (Laughter, applause) but the principal he was gettingat is that a democracy doesn't work unless the people are educated.

And he said the final repository, the ultimate repository of all knowledge must rest with the people. There's no one good enough or smart enough to invest that control in a truly democratic society. We call for a full opening of the files, not dribbled out with pre-censorship, like Freedom of Information Act documents with pieces missing, not to selected historians or medical experts, not to a special prosecutor or yet another Congressional investigation, but to the people themselves.

Much of what we know about the Kennedy case, and the evidence of conspiracy comes from the hard work of independent individual investigators whose names are not mentioned in large part in the (JFK) film – Mae Brussell, Penn Jones, Sylvia Meagher, Jochem Joestine, Paris Flamonde, and that's only a few, the current researchers - Robert Groden and Philip Melanson are still continuing to follow the evidence. When that material comes out it they will be extra little pieces in the jig saw puzzle of the mosaic, but we've had enough out in these many years to solve the case. There's enough of the picture visible in the record and the historical view that we have in order to get at the bottom of it. So I don't see the files as ultimately holding a smoking gun as merely telling us one moretime what the government did or didn't find out about the case.

I would like to support the film. I think outside the films done by civil war buffs who try to get every uniform and every rifle right, that Oliver Stone has done the most historically accurate work on the Kennedy assassination to date. The reason that it has struck a nerve is that this is the hidden secret in the American psychic since that day – November 22nd 63. The American public has known, and in fact I would contend has been told, over and over, that there was a conspiracy to kill the President of the United States, that the people who did it got away with it, and that we can't touch them. And I think that's in a large part that's why so few people vote now a days. But Stone has gone in to that darkness, shown a light and looked at things and I think the conclusion of his film is right. From my own work, I read the 26 volumes of Warren Commission. You know Allen Dulles, when he was asked about releasing the evidence by HaleBoggs, said go ahead and print it, nobody will read it anyway. Unfortunately,especially in a post-literate generation, Stone's film is about the only thingthat will reach youth. There are a few people who still read, but as you know the FBI is trying to get our names from the library.

[Laughter]

So this has crossed over the line and that's why it's so disturbing. But let me tell you two stories that convinced me that this was notonly a conspiracy, but a conspiracy well beyond the capability of any Mafia goon, of any CIA schleper, of any renegade element in US intelligence, of oil men with a beef - these were layers of the onion that were planted at the beginning so we would never see the core.

My mother worked for twenty-five years, thirty years all together, but twenty five years for thedeputy chief of staff in the personnel office of the U.S. Army, directly under the Joint Chiefs of Staff. She was the highest paid women employee in the Pentagon, five levels above top security. I mentioned to Fletcher Prouty the other day that I worked from the bottom up and he worked from the top down and we met at the Joint Chiefs. My mother's job was to project overall national draft call figures five years in advance. She had to project an annual national selective service call that was right within a hundred people either way, five years ahead. She knew from those projection and from the information she got that they were with drawing from Vietnam. And if you want to get all the papers that prove Prouty's point, I just got this today at the Government Printing Office – Foreign Relations United States –61-63, the State Department papers are released in Volume Four of the VietnamSeries, this is August-September, 1963, and the national security memorandumare in there. They talk about Kennedy's plan. It's been backed up by Arthur Schlesinger, and more recently, yesterday, or the day before in the New York Times by Roger Hillsman. He (Kennedy) was pulling out and my mother knew that because she had to predict those kinds of figures. I asked her after she retired, when did they tell you they would escalate in Vietnam,because she had to be one of the first to know? She said late November, 1963. Isaid, the last week in November, 1963? And she said yes, the Monday followingthe assassination. I said was this a few more advisors or a change in policy?She said I couldn't believe the figures. I took them back to the Joint Chiefs, in what must have been the first protest by the civilian community against the war in Vietnam,and said, "these can't be right." They said, "You'll use them." They told her on November 25, 1963 that the war in Vietnam would last for ten years, and that 57,000 Americans would die and to figure that in.

I also talked to SAC bomber pilots – Strategic Air Command bomber pilots who had the responsibility of nuclear and emergency response, who were in the air on regular shifts 24 hours a day. They were in the air over Wright-Patterson Air Force Base when they heard the news that Kennedy had been shot. They ran to open lockers that contain a crypto-graphic code book that allows them to tellwhether the President is calling them and to take orders to go out to Fail Safeand nuclear war. There wasn't a pilot in the air at that hour, at least overWright-Pat any way, and I would contend that this was the case everywhere else,as there's no reason to isolate it – that had a code book in that locker. Weknow from Pierre Salinger's book that there was no code book aboard the Cabinet plane bringing the entire cabinet back from the important meetings that changed the course in Vietnamin the next few days. They were in the air and had no way to securely communicate with the White House or the President. There is nobody who cantouch those code book besides the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the highest levelsof defense intelligence. And at every level at my work it is the Office of Navy Intelligence (ONI) is who rears its head on the mechanic level with the Defense Industrial Security Command. This is the background of Lee Oswald, Guy Bannister and Jack Ruby when we go into them. And what ever is in the record will back that up. The physical evidence is already in front of us – so we know that one lone nut with a an old gun that lost the war for the Italians in World War II, which couldn't even shoot a bullet to line up with its own scope, didn't do the damage in Dallas. But Kennedy wasn't all that was killed that day. Democracy died.

[Applause]

Edited by William Kelly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

biggrin.gifthank you Bill...three cheers... b

Read not to contradict and confute, nor to believe and take for granted,...but to weigh and consider.......

Frances Bacon...

Edited by Bernice Moore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Robert Morrow

That is a great speech by John Judge; and he still gives it often at COPA.

If you asked John Judge who murdered John Kennedy he will tell you the order came down from the Joint Chiefs of Staff and that Gen. Curtis LeMay played a big role in the JFK assassination.

I have been studying Gen. Curtis Lemay recently and he is a very likely candidate for killing JFK in conjunction with the other plotters. Rememember LeMay was put on the 1968 American Independent ticket as VP at the orders of the funders of Wallace's campaign - the Texas oil men, people like H.L. Hunt who was a key Lyndon Johnson backer for decades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From washingtoncitypaper.com

Stirring the Plot

By Molly Redden • September 7, 2012

Excerpt:

John Judge first utters the word “conspiracy” 37 minutes into our hour-and-a-half conversation, but the word has floated over our table in a crowded Starbucks near the Capitol from the moment we sat down.

Judge, 64, is a longtime fixture of what could be called the alternative history circuit—a space brimming with earthly explanations for UFO sightings and sinister hypotheses about U.S. involvement in the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. But there are academics on the spectrum of alt-history, too, who, calling their field “parapolitics” or “deep history,” defy mainstream history through scholarship. Judge bridges the pseudo and scholastic ends of the alt-history world—at least, that is how he would like to be seen, as he hastens his ambitions to open the Museum of Hidden History.

With his scraggly white beard, Judge resembles a slightly worse-for-wear Santa Claus. “The Museum of Hidden History will be three things,” he says, speaking so softly I strain to hear him. “History that we’ve made assumptions about and have been miseducated about. History that goes beyond our paradigms or for which we lack counternarratives. And history that has been stolen from us by the national security state.” Some examples include exhibits on what is known, and what is still unknown, about the political assassinations of the 1960s, or on shortchanged minority and female perspectives on history. He also has plans for a research library, with thousands of documents wrested from federal agencies by good government groups.

Full story: http://www.washingto...rring-the-plot/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...