Mark Stapleton
-
Posts
1,846 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Mark Stapleton
-
-
As usual, found while looking for something else.
http://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/history/wc_pe...e_in_Texas.html
Tussle in TexasSaul Friedman
The Nation, 3 February 1964, pp. 114–117
Saul Friedman is on the staff of the Houston Chronicle.
Houston
Late last October, Southern Methodist University in Dallas published The Decision-Makers, a penetrating, sociological study of the close-knit power structure that for years has ruled Dallas in its image. “The city,” wrote author Carol Estes Thometz, “would suffer if such power were concentrated in the hands of men who would use it unwisely.” At least one member of the Dallas power structure, Stanley Marcus, president of the Neiman-Marcus store, now believes that wisdom was lacking. For on November 22, and in the days since, the city suffered.
Yet little has changed in Dallas. If anything, the murder of President Kennedy has strengthened the decision makers—the men who built their city into a bastion of rigid conservatism, and who have tolerated, when they did not actively support, the rabid Right as a means of frightening moderate and liberal dissenters into silence.
The Dallas Morning News, spokesman for the power structure and the hard Right, says that J. Erik Jonsson, who has been at the top of Miss Thometz’s power pyramid, has agreed to become mayor should the incumbent Earle Cabell resign to run against ultra-conservative Rep. Bruce Alger. And Robert Morris, long a right-wing leader, enjoys strong Dallas support in his race for the Republican senatorial nomination against a moderate conservative, George Bush of Houston.
Dallas, the home of billionaire H. L. Hunt and former General Edwin Walker, continues to be a mecca for speakers like the Reverend Billy James Hargis, John Birch Society leader John Rousselot, and former Major Arch Roberts, the one-time aide to Walker and author of his “pro-Blue” troop indoctrination course. Roberts, in town to pay his respects to his former chief, and to speak before the Minute Women and Hunt-supported Pro-America, charged that traitors (he included Dean Acheson and Philip Jessup) had created the United Nations, that it was now Communist-dominated and that American soldiers are being brainwashed by civilian meddlers to prepare them to fight under a UN Soviet commander.
Hunt’s “Life-Lines” is still on the air, and Birch Society meetings grow larger.
In Dallas and elsewhere in Texas, the extreme Right seems to be regrouping along the line recently promulgated in advertisements and intra-organization bulletins by the Birch Society. It goes like this: There is no reason for Dallas, or Texas, or conservatives, or the nation to do any post-assassination soul searching. President Kennedy was not their victim—he was killed by the international Communist conspiracy.
A letter received by the Houston Chronicle from a woman reader vividly sums up the point of view:
A display of hatred has not always been considered so terrible. Even Christ showed anger and hatred.
Now I do not presume to compare the attitude of the people of Dallas with Christ, but I simply wish to remind those individuals who have so vociferously criticized Dallas that sometimes justified hate can be of some good.…Dallas should not be criticized for its hatred for anti-Americanism.
The blame for the assassination should not be placed upon Dallas but where it actually belongs—on the Communist conspiracy, as aided and abetted by the Supreme Court, which ever since that tragic day in Dallas, has steadfastly refused to enact laws to clamp down on Communist sympathizers in this country, and upon the shoulders of the U.S. Attorney General, who instead of rounding up these known Communists, was so busy watching the “horrible right wing” that the President was murdered by a Communist.
Until recently I did not understand why the Birchers were so adamant about impeaching Earl Warren, but in the light of events since the assassination, I am beginning to see the light. Yes, there is a deep, burning hatred in Dallas, and I pray to God that it may continue and spread throughout the entire nation until the Communist malignancy which is threatening all of our lives is completely destroyed.
This was one of a number of letters, playing variations on the same theme, that were received by Texas newspapers following statements made on the assassination by Birch Society founder, Robert Welch.
In Dallas and Houston, some Protestant ministers have told their congregations that the slaying of the President, though lamentable, was an act of God—that Kennedy was struck down because he was a Catholic President.
It should be said here that Houston does not take second place in right-wing activity to Dallas; it never has. Robert Welch has singled Houston out as a Birch Society “stronghold” second only perhaps to Los Angeles.
In the week following the assassination, one of Houston’s top attorneys was lunching with one of the wealthiest and most influential men in South Texas at a Houston businessman’s club. “I don’t hold with murder,” said the wealthy man. “But I can’t say I’m not glad to see us rid of that bushy-haired bastard from Boston.”
Houston, however, is politically more mobile than Dallas; the liberal or moderate can find room to move, a place to speak and people to listen. In Houston there is a large, largely Democratic, working force and an active trade-union movement. There are also more Negroes in Houston and they have an influence on city politics. Finally, Houston is not governed by an organized oligarchy.
But although Houston has been able to absorb and digest the activity of the rabid Right, the stream of speakers coming into the city gives good indication that the right wing in Texas is not about to roll over and play dead. On a rainy night less than a month after the assassination, a crowd of 700 turned out at a Birch Society meeting to hear Westbrook Pegler. The aging columnist decided not to use his prepared speech, which castigated the Kennedy administration, and the chairman reflected the crowd’s disappointment at this show of respect. “I guess he [Pegler] wants the body to get cold. As for me and the rest of the people here, I would just as soon listen to what he was going to say.”
Major Roberts and Robert Morris have recently appeared in Houston, and Admiral Ben Moreel and Sen. Strom Thurmond are on the schedule.
A series of films from the right-wing propaganda factory at Harding College in Arkansas is being shown at Houston civic clubs and has been offered to the schools, and the local Birch Society held an overwhelmingly successful two-day conclave in mid-January to set their post-Kennedy strategy. In a Houston mayoralty election held about a week after the assassination, the candidate backed by the extreme Right won over a man who had been a Kennedy campaigner in 1960.
There are some oases in this right-wing desert, although the hunt for water by Houston liberals leads them to cheer some spurious victories. In a recent Republican County chairman’s race, for instance, a “moderate” beat a member of the far Right. The “moderate” was an avid supporter of Goldwater, but in the Texas context he is entitled to his label because he does not associate with the absolutist, quasi-racist, rabid Right.
And the breach between the conservative Democrats and liberals has been healed by the overtures President Johnson has made to liberal standard-bearer Senator Ralph Yarborough. The truce is apt to hold at least until November, and there is a chance that Harris County will go Democratic for the first time since 1948.
In Dallas, however, there is little prospect that the ultra-conservative hold over both parties will be broken. If Senator Goldwater is not nominated, the far Right may be thrown into confusion and Dallas County may go for Johnson, but the rightist grip on the city will not be broken.
It will not be broken because for too long—since the heyday of McCarthy—the city’s mass media have given the rightists a respectable platform from which to crusade against the liberalist-Socialist-Communist-atheist infidel. Before Dallas had the blood of a President on its hands, its mouth was filled with spittle for then Senator Johnson and his wife, and later for Adlai Stevenson.
Strong elements in Dallas view the federal government as some alien power. After years of openly evading the Supreme Court’s order to desegregate the schools, aged Federal Judge T. Whitefield Davidson helped fan the flames of anti-federal hatred by telling Negro attorneys that he was ordering desegregation because the government was “forcing it on the community without its consent.” Speaking in his courtroom, Davidson called the desegregation order a “Negro victory” and likened the position of Dallas whites to Lee at Appomattox.
Dallas has spawned the National Indignation Convention, which cheered when Birch leader Tom Anderson told them that World War II was the wrong war, fought against the wrong enemy. Dallas is the place where the Ku Klux Klan was revived in Texas. It is also the home of the Texas Aryans, and the city that stood by while a high school boy was pilloried with anti-Semitic abuse because he wrote, for his school paper, a favorable review of Cat on a Hot Tin Roof.
Dallas is also a cultivated city, the city of the Margo James theatre, a city that has a fine symphony orchestra and art museums. But its art circles were helpless against the determination of the Dallas Public Affairs Luncheon Club to keep works by Picasso and Jo Davidson out of the museum. And the music lovers obligingly called off the scheduled recital by a touring Russian string quartet.
In her study of Dallas, Miss Thometz points out that such things could not have happened without at least the tacit consent of the power structure she traces. Although the political parties, and the quasi-political crusading organizations have power, “Dallas is a city characterized by men of power rather than by organizations of power,” wrote Miss Thometz.
Little in the city gets done unless the organized oligarchy wants it done. This is not to say that various individuals cannot write letters, hold meetings or otherwise speak their piece. But the right wing created the climate of Dallas, and the oligarchy permitted that climate because it seemed to thrive in it.
Therefore if a change is to come about in Dallas’ climate it must be wrought by the power structure. Dallas is probably unique among the large cities of America in that its “establishment” is no ill-defined, amorphous group. but one easily discernible because it is organized into a body which operates openly. It calls itself the Dallas Citizens Council (not to be confused with the racist citizens councils) and includes approximately 230 men who are the chief executives of the largest business and financial institutions in the city.
The Dallas Citizens Council, though largely Republican, is nominally bipartisan. It keeps party politics out of city elections, but makes sure that those elected—Republican or Democrat—are ideologically in its image. This it rarely needs to exert direct influence on the city administration.
The political arm of the Dallas Citizens Council is the City Charter Association, which for years has controlled city politics. Dallas’ long-time mayor, R. L. Thornton, a banker, has been president of the D.C.C. The present mayor, Earle Cabell, went into office over the opposition of the Citizens Charter Association, but his proposals were then beaten down by city council members who were protégés of the Charter Association, and he made peace with the D.C.C.
Today, Dallas’ power structure seems more concerned with the city’s image than with the death of the President, and all the subtle and unsubtle causes for the murder. Dr. E. S. James, editor of the influential Baptist Standard, says: “Right-thinking Texans will always grieve that such a dastardly crime should have been committed in their state.” The Dallas News said: “It cannot be charged with fairness that an entire city is in national disgrace, but certainly its reputation has suffered regrettable damage.” Many citizens want to erect a permanent marker at the spot where the President was shot, but members of the Citizens Council think it might be better to pay for a memorial to be erected in Washington.
Keith Shelton, political editor of the Dallas Times-Herald puts the reaction of the Dallas Citizens Council this way: “It will still tend to agree with the far Right, but the D.C.C. will not let the right-wingers go as far was they have gone in the past. That would blemish Dallas’ fair name. Basically the Dallas Citizens Council is more worried about Dallas’ fair name, and about their own position. They want to maintain the status quo, and if that means cutting down on the right wing for now, they’ll do it.”
By putting a lid, at least temporarily, on the far Right, members of the power structure are, paradoxically, making themselves stronger. For in the days before November 22, it was becoming evident that party-conscious young Republicans, led by Representative Bruce Alger, posed a threat to the hegemony of the oligarchy. The Dallas Citizens Council, Miss Thometz points out, was Republican only in national elections. In city, county and state politics they sought the candidate who best represented and protected their interests. Since Texas politics are controlled by Democrats, the Dallas power structure remained “tory” Democrats.
Alger, therefore, never became part of the power structure, although he was helped by the oligarchy in past elections. He began to lose his D.C.C. support when he led the mob that attacked Johnson in the 1960 campaign, when he said Dallas didn’t need any federal money, and when ridding Dallas of Alger seemed a good way of ridding the city of its assassination guilt. The D.C.C. has now designated Mayor Earle Cabell as the man to beat him.
The power structure intends to maintain its authority. With the announcement that Cabell may resign to run for Congress, the D.C.C. has announced that J. Erik Jonsson “has consented to become mayor.” Jonsson, a Republican, is former president of the D.C.C., and chairman of the committee for the luncheon to which Kennedy was going when he was shot.
There is some hope, though, for a break in the almost totalitarian control of the city’s political climate. The Democratic Party, which was opposed to Kennedy, now seems able to rally support around Johnson because he is more palatable to conservative Democrats and because the assassination has put some fight into Democrats who have stayed away from precinct meetings rather than oppose the tories.
Just after the assassination, a new organization, the North Dallas Democrats, came into being. It is committed to a conservative-liberal coalition and pledges its support for the national Democratic ticket. This may not seem unusual, but it is the first open Democratic organization that has dared to put itself on record in support of the party leader since 1948. Only eighty-seven attended its first meeting, but at last count there were 700 members.
The resurgence of a Democratic Party ideologically in tune with the national party, is a sign of hope in Dallas, and so is the exhortation by D.C.C. member Stanley Marcus that Dallas be made safe for diversity.
But it remains to be seen whether real diversity, or the North Dallas Democrats, will have a meaningful role in the future operation of the city. And it remains to be seen whether the power structure will give up any of its sovereignty to representatives of the 130,000 Negroes in Dallas, or the Dallas A.F.L.-C.I.O.
If the Dallas Citizens Council continues to deny the legitimate liberal-
moderate groups their right to take an active and effective role in the dialogue of Dallas, those groups can operate only on the fringes of the city’s political life. And there they must suffer from malnutrition. Because that has happened in the past, the right wing established itself as the voice of Dallas. If the voice of liberalism and moderation is again stifled, the dialogue will again become a monologue—in the harsh, irresponsible voice of the far Right.
Lee,
Excellent post. What a lovely little nest of hatred filled vipers they were.
-
As usual, found while looking for something else.
http://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/history/wc_pe...e_in_Texas.html
Tussle in TexasSaul Friedman
The Nation, 3 February 1964, pp. 114–117
Saul Friedman is on the staff of the Houston Chronicle.
Houston
Late last October, Southern Methodist University in Dallas published The Decision-Makers, a penetrating, sociological study of the close-knit power structure that for years has ruled Dallas in its image. “The city,” wrote author Carol Estes Thometz, “would suffer if such power were concentrated in the hands of men who would use it unwisely.” At least one member of the Dallas power structure, Stanley Marcus, president of the Neiman-Marcus store, now believes that wisdom was lacking. For on November 22, and in the days since, the city suffered.
Yet little has changed in Dallas. If anything, the murder of President Kennedy has strengthened the decision makers—the men who built their city into a bastion of rigid conservatism, and who have tolerated, when they did not actively support, the rabid Right as a means of frightening moderate and liberal dissenters into silence.
The Dallas Morning News, spokesman for the power structure and the hard Right, says that J. Erik Jonsson, who has been at the top of Miss Thometz’s power pyramid, has agreed to become mayor should the incumbent Earle Cabell resign to run against ultra-conservative Rep. Bruce Alger. And Robert Morris, long a right-wing leader, enjoys strong Dallas support in his race for the Republican senatorial nomination against a moderate conservative, George Bush of Houston.
Dallas, the home of billionaire H. L. Hunt and former General Edwin Walker, continues to be a mecca for speakers like the Reverend Billy James Hargis, John Birch Society leader John Rousselot, and former Major Arch Roberts, the one-time aide to Walker and author of his “pro-Blue” troop indoctrination course. Roberts, in town to pay his respects to his former chief, and to speak before the Minute Women and Hunt-supported Pro-America, charged that traitors (he included Dean Acheson and Philip Jessup) had created the United Nations, that it was now Communist-dominated and that American soldiers are being brainwashed by civilian meddlers to prepare them to fight under a UN Soviet commander.
Hunt’s “Life-Lines” is still on the air, and Birch Society meetings grow larger.
In Dallas and elsewhere in Texas, the extreme Right seems to be regrouping along the line recently promulgated in advertisements and intra-organization bulletins by the Birch Society. It goes like this: There is no reason for Dallas, or Texas, or conservatives, or the nation to do any post-assassination soul searching. President Kennedy was not their victim—he was killed by the international Communist conspiracy.
A letter received by the Houston Chronicle from a woman reader vividly sums up the point of view:
A display of hatred has not always been considered so terrible. Even Christ showed anger and hatred.
Now I do not presume to compare the attitude of the people of Dallas with Christ, but I simply wish to remind those individuals who have so vociferously criticized Dallas that sometimes justified hate can be of some good.…Dallas should not be criticized for its hatred for anti-Americanism.
The blame for the assassination should not be placed upon Dallas but where it actually belongs—on the Communist conspiracy, as aided and abetted by the Supreme Court, which ever since that tragic day in Dallas, has steadfastly refused to enact laws to clamp down on Communist sympathizers in this country, and upon the shoulders of the U.S. Attorney General, who instead of rounding up these known Communists, was so busy watching the “horrible right wing” that the President was murdered by a Communist.
Until recently I did not understand why the Birchers were so adamant about impeaching Earl Warren, but in the light of events since the assassination, I am beginning to see the light. Yes, there is a deep, burning hatred in Dallas, and I pray to God that it may continue and spread throughout the entire nation until the Communist malignancy which is threatening all of our lives is completely destroyed.
This was one of a number of letters, playing variations on the same theme, that were received by Texas newspapers following statements made on the assassination by Birch Society founder, Robert Welch.
In Dallas and Houston, some Protestant ministers have told their congregations that the slaying of the President, though lamentable, was an act of God—that Kennedy was struck down because he was a Catholic President.
It should be said here that Houston does not take second place in right-wing activity to Dallas; it never has. Robert Welch has singled Houston out as a Birch Society “stronghold” second only perhaps to Los Angeles.
In the week following the assassination, one of Houston’s top attorneys was lunching with one of the wealthiest and most influential men in South Texas at a Houston businessman’s club. “I don’t hold with murder,” said the wealthy man. “But I can’t say I’m not glad to see us rid of that bushy-haired bastard from Boston.”
Houston, however, is politically more mobile than Dallas; the liberal or moderate can find room to move, a place to speak and people to listen. In Houston there is a large, largely Democratic, working force and an active trade-union movement. There are also more Negroes in Houston and they have an influence on city politics. Finally, Houston is not governed by an organized oligarchy.
But although Houston has been able to absorb and digest the activity of the rabid Right, the stream of speakers coming into the city gives good indication that the right wing in Texas is not about to roll over and play dead. On a rainy night less than a month after the assassination, a crowd of 700 turned out at a Birch Society meeting to hear Westbrook Pegler. The aging columnist decided not to use his prepared speech, which castigated the Kennedy administration, and the chairman reflected the crowd’s disappointment at this show of respect. “I guess he [Pegler] wants the body to get cold. As for me and the rest of the people here, I would just as soon listen to what he was going to say.”
Major Roberts and Robert Morris have recently appeared in Houston, and Admiral Ben Moreel and Sen. Strom Thurmond are on the schedule.
A series of films from the right-wing propaganda factory at Harding College in Arkansas is being shown at Houston civic clubs and has been offered to the schools, and the local Birch Society held an overwhelmingly successful two-day conclave in mid-January to set their post-Kennedy strategy. In a Houston mayoralty election held about a week after the assassination, the candidate backed by the extreme Right won over a man who had been a Kennedy campaigner in 1960.
There are some oases in this right-wing desert, although the hunt for water by Houston liberals leads them to cheer some spurious victories. In a recent Republican County chairman’s race, for instance, a “moderate” beat a member of the far Right. The “moderate” was an avid supporter of Goldwater, but in the Texas context he is entitled to his label because he does not associate with the absolutist, quasi-racist, rabid Right.
And the breach between the conservative Democrats and liberals has been healed by the overtures President Johnson has made to liberal standard-bearer Senator Ralph Yarborough. The truce is apt to hold at least until November, and there is a chance that Harris County will go Democratic for the first time since 1948.
In Dallas, however, there is little prospect that the ultra-conservative hold over both parties will be broken. If Senator Goldwater is not nominated, the far Right may be thrown into confusion and Dallas County may go for Johnson, but the rightist grip on the city will not be broken.
It will not be broken because for too long—since the heyday of McCarthy—the city’s mass media have given the rightists a respectable platform from which to crusade against the liberalist-Socialist-Communist-atheist infidel. Before Dallas had the blood of a President on its hands, its mouth was filled with spittle for then Senator Johnson and his wife, and later for Adlai Stevenson.
Strong elements in Dallas view the federal government as some alien power. After years of openly evading the Supreme Court’s order to desegregate the schools, aged Federal Judge T. Whitefield Davidson helped fan the flames of anti-federal hatred by telling Negro attorneys that he was ordering desegregation because the government was “forcing it on the community without its consent.” Speaking in his courtroom, Davidson called the desegregation order a “Negro victory” and likened the position of Dallas whites to Lee at Appomattox.
Dallas has spawned the National Indignation Convention, which cheered when Birch leader Tom Anderson told them that World War II was the wrong war, fought against the wrong enemy. Dallas is the place where the Ku Klux Klan was revived in Texas. It is also the home of the Texas Aryans, and the city that stood by while a high school boy was pilloried with anti-Semitic abuse because he wrote, for his school paper, a favorable review of Cat on a Hot Tin Roof.
Dallas is also a cultivated city, the city of the Margo James theatre, a city that has a fine symphony orchestra and art museums. But its art circles were helpless against the determination of the Dallas Public Affairs Luncheon Club to keep works by Picasso and Jo Davidson out of the museum. And the music lovers obligingly called off the scheduled recital by a touring Russian string quartet.
In her study of Dallas, Miss Thometz points out that such things could not have happened without at least the tacit consent of the power structure she traces. Although the political parties, and the quasi-political crusading organizations have power, “Dallas is a city characterized by men of power rather than by organizations of power,” wrote Miss Thometz.
Little in the city gets done unless the organized oligarchy wants it done. This is not to say that various individuals cannot write letters, hold meetings or otherwise speak their piece. But the right wing created the climate of Dallas, and the oligarchy permitted that climate because it seemed to thrive in it.
Therefore if a change is to come about in Dallas’ climate it must be wrought by the power structure. Dallas is probably unique among the large cities of America in that its “establishment” is no ill-defined, amorphous group. but one easily discernible because it is organized into a body which operates openly. It calls itself the Dallas Citizens Council (not to be confused with the racist citizens councils) and includes approximately 230 men who are the chief executives of the largest business and financial institutions in the city.
The Dallas Citizens Council, though largely Republican, is nominally bipartisan. It keeps party politics out of city elections, but makes sure that those elected—Republican or Democrat—are ideologically in its image. This it rarely needs to exert direct influence on the city administration.
The political arm of the Dallas Citizens Council is the City Charter Association, which for years has controlled city politics. Dallas’ long-time mayor, R. L. Thornton, a banker, has been president of the D.C.C. The present mayor, Earle Cabell, went into office over the opposition of the Citizens Charter Association, but his proposals were then beaten down by city council members who were protégés of the Charter Association, and he made peace with the D.C.C.
Today, Dallas’ power structure seems more concerned with the city’s image than with the death of the President, and all the subtle and unsubtle causes for the murder. Dr. E. S. James, editor of the influential Baptist Standard, says: “Right-thinking Texans will always grieve that such a dastardly crime should have been committed in their state.” The Dallas News said: “It cannot be charged with fairness that an entire city is in national disgrace, but certainly its reputation has suffered regrettable damage.” Many citizens want to erect a permanent marker at the spot where the President was shot, but members of the Citizens Council think it might be better to pay for a memorial to be erected in Washington.
Keith Shelton, political editor of the Dallas Times-Herald puts the reaction of the Dallas Citizens Council this way: “It will still tend to agree with the far Right, but the D.C.C. will not let the right-wingers go as far was they have gone in the past. That would blemish Dallas’ fair name. Basically the Dallas Citizens Council is more worried about Dallas’ fair name, and about their own position. They want to maintain the status quo, and if that means cutting down on the right wing for now, they’ll do it.”
By putting a lid, at least temporarily, on the far Right, members of the power structure are, paradoxically, making themselves stronger. For in the days before November 22, it was becoming evident that party-conscious young Republicans, led by Representative Bruce Alger, posed a threat to the hegemony of the oligarchy. The Dallas Citizens Council, Miss Thometz points out, was Republican only in national elections. In city, county and state politics they sought the candidate who best represented and protected their interests. Since Texas politics are controlled by Democrats, the Dallas power structure remained “tory” Democrats.
Alger, therefore, never became part of the power structure, although he was helped by the oligarchy in past elections. He began to lose his D.C.C. support when he led the mob that attacked Johnson in the 1960 campaign, when he said Dallas didn’t need any federal money, and when ridding Dallas of Alger seemed a good way of ridding the city of its assassination guilt. The D.C.C. has now designated Mayor Earle Cabell as the man to beat him.
The power structure intends to maintain its authority. With the announcement that Cabell may resign to run for Congress, the D.C.C. has announced that J. Erik Jonsson “has consented to become mayor.” Jonsson, a Republican, is former president of the D.C.C., and chairman of the committee for the luncheon to which Kennedy was going when he was shot.
There is some hope, though, for a break in the almost totalitarian control of the city’s political climate. The Democratic Party, which was opposed to Kennedy, now seems able to rally support around Johnson because he is more palatable to conservative Democrats and because the assassination has put some fight into Democrats who have stayed away from precinct meetings rather than oppose the tories.
Just after the assassination, a new organization, the North Dallas Democrats, came into being. It is committed to a conservative-liberal coalition and pledges its support for the national Democratic ticket. This may not seem unusual, but it is the first open Democratic organization that has dared to put itself on record in support of the party leader since 1948. Only eighty-seven attended its first meeting, but at last count there were 700 members.
The resurgence of a Democratic Party ideologically in tune with the national party, is a sign of hope in Dallas, and so is the exhortation by D.C.C. member Stanley Marcus that Dallas be made safe for diversity.
But it remains to be seen whether real diversity, or the North Dallas Democrats, will have a meaningful role in the future operation of the city. And it remains to be seen whether the power structure will give up any of its sovereignty to representatives of the 130,000 Negroes in Dallas, or the Dallas A.F.L.-C.I.O.
If the Dallas Citizens Council continues to deny the legitimate liberal-
moderate groups their right to take an active and effective role in the dialogue of Dallas, those groups can operate only on the fringes of the city’s political life. And there they must suffer from malnutrition. Because that has happened in the past, the right wing established itself as the voice of Dallas. If the voice of liberalism and moderation is again stifled, the dialogue will again become a monologue—in the harsh, irresponsible voice of the far Right.
Lee,
Excellent post. What a lovely little nest of hatred filled vipers they were.
-
Hidden meanings in Elvis lyrics, the Purple Gang and Tim Gratz defending Meyer Lansky. This thread's freaking me out.
p.s. I didn't realise that Meyer had Republican Party connections--thanks for the heads-up Tim.
-
Sorry, the Mafia is considered a "false sponsor" on this Forum!
David,
As you're probably aware, Tim is the Forum's resident Republican Party glovepuppet. Mention the Mafia, Castro or any evil lefties as suspects and he's all ears but mention a Republican Party figure and he yells and screams like a 3 year old. It's amazing to watch.
As for your post, it does look like Governor Rhodes was working for someone other than his constituents. While I don't believe the Italian mafia had the necessary influence to be behind the assassination, I do believe one mafia figure may have been implicated--Jewish kingpin Meyer Lansky. According to Lucky Luciano's autobiography, Lansky's influence grew steadily after Luciano's departure and by the fifties Lansky was omnipotent.
-
Very witty. Very, very witty. I'll need time, about a month I reckon. Do you know Mark King's email address? Luckily, my piece won't have much to beat. So far, it's been all wild speculation.
-
I’ve searched what sources I have on Maxwell Taylor’s supposed presence at Andrews on the arrival of AF1 from Dallas. As you’ll recall, the official story, told in Manchester, is that Taylor and the other JCS were meeting in the Pentagon that day with West German officers. We also know from both Manchester and McNamara’s account that McNamara met with the JCS after the news came from Dallas. These stories are at least misleading in that Curtis LeMay, as we learn in his biography Iron Eagle, was in Michigan on 11/22. Manchester goes into considerable detail about the JCS sessions with the West Germans, yet fails to comment on the absence of the JCS’s most notorious member.
McNamara says that RFK called him after the murder and asked that he and Taylor accompany him to Andrews. Both Manchester and the biography RFK by C. David Heymann agree that RFK, McNamara, and Taylor went together to Andrews. McNamara is likely the original source of this information. (In Evan Thomas’s biography Robert Kennedy: His Life, there is no mention of how or with whom RFK went to Andrews.) McNamara of course is also the source of the story that he and Taylor had planned to go later that day to Hyannis Port for the Thanksgiving weekend to talk budget with JFK, even though it wasn’t Thanksgiving weekend and JFK had planned to spend the morning of 11/23 at LBJ’s ranch, meaning he couldn’t possibly get to Hyannis Port before mid or late afternoon that Saturday. (So what was the point of this illogical Thanksgiving tale, other than to reiterate Taylor's presence?)
Yet at Andrews, Taylor disappears. In all the sources I have, only Manchester retains him, but only as something of a specter: “In Taylor’s words, he ‘wandered about aimlessly, thinking gloomy thoughts’.” Taylor is nowhere at the scene in the news coverage compiled in President Kennedy Has Been Shot, nor in Jim Bishop’s account (indeed he is mentioned nowhere in Bishops’ book). The sources tell us that LBJ at Andrews asked McNamara, Bundy, and undersecretary of state George Ball to go with him to the White House. We are told that various officials, including McNamara, Earl Warren, and Arthur Schlesinger, shook Johnson’s hand at Andrews, and that Mike Mansfield, while comforting a weeping Mrs. Mansfield, gave LBJ a nod. But by all accounts, at Andrews the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and Johnson did not even acknowledge each other.
Ron
Ron,
Great work. Suddenly it's looking like Taylor might not have been in Washington. Up to now, I had never considered McNamara could be implicated but maybe he was in the loop also. Wonder what Jim Root thinks of this?
I might be reading too much into it, but is there a touch of symbolism in LBJ specifically asking the Secretary of State and his Undersecretary to accompany him up to the White House? There's a passage in Manchester in which someone asks McGeorge Bundy about the State Department, to which Bundy curtly replies "State is making its own arrangements". I always thought Manchester slipped there, telling readers a little more than they were meant to know.
BTW, is there any way of determining who LeMay visited in Michigan? Relatives maybe, but the man who pulled Gerald Ford's strings lived in Michigan--Detroit billionaire Max Fisher. I believe he's still there, now about 95 yo.
-
In addition to restriction on civil liberties and the overt political paranoia of Communist Governments, the thing that most appalls people like Tim is their "godlessness". I believe Tim will confirm this. John, don't hold your breath waiting for Tim to defend his latest indefensible comment--'"all Communists are liars"--even a good debater would find it almost impossible. Also, there's others in the queue ahead of you. I'm still waiting for Tim to advise me of the parts of Sorenson's bio of JFK which so emphatically exonerate Douglas Dillon from involvement or foreknowledge. "Dillon would have laid down his life for his friend (JFK)", Tim said. Surely you jest, Tim.
-
fascanating subject, Carol - one I've wondered about but never looked into - other than NO debriefing upon his return to the continental US - I'll be interested in any followup...
David Healy
David,
Since my original post, I have been directed to THIS WEBSITE, where I found some additional info regarding Oswald's reentry from Russia.
The info on this website is taken from the Warren Commission Report. Part of the loan info is quoted below:
" After his reentry, Oswald repaid his loan without having to be reminded by the Department to do so. The early payments were very small because he first repaid the approximately $200 he had borrowed from his brother Robert to apply against the expenses of his travel from New York to Fort Worth, Tex. The schedule of payments is as follows:
Aug 13, 1962 10.00
Sep. 5 1962 9.71
Oct. 10 1062 10.00
Nov. 19 1962 10.00
Dec. 11 1962 190.00
Jan. 8 1062 100.00
Jan 28 1962 106.00
Total: 435.71"
Note the amount of the last 3 payments. I am assuming that the last payment was made in January of 1963, rather than 1962, and that this is a typo. I am going to do some more digging. It will be interesting to find out where he was working during the three months that these large payments were supposedly made. My husband and I were newly married and living on one minimum wage income (his) during 1963. Payments of this size would have been next to impossible for us at that time. This may be a trivial point, but it interests me, as I have always believed that Oswald was connected in some way to either the FBI or the CIA.
Carol,
I agree with David G--nice researching.
-
Tim Carroll has pointed out a couple of interesting things about this line from McNamara's book:After the meeting, I planned to fly up to Hyannis Port with Joint Chiefs Chairman Max Taylor to present my proposals to the president over the Thanksgiving weekend.
First, JFK was supposed to stay at the LBJ ranch. Second, Thanksgiving was still a week away. To which I would add, why would they take up JFK's "holiday" weekend with the budget instead of the urgently held Honolulu Conference that McNamara and Taylor had just returned from on the fate of South Vietnam?
Did McNamara come up with this scenario, along with the bit about Taylor going with him to Andrews, as a way of emphasizing Taylor's presence? A lot of cover stories don't stand up to much scrutiny, and this may be one of them.
Ron
Ron,
I like your line of thinking here. We may have to realise that commonly accepted facts concerning such things as persons' whereabouts might require another look. I always regarded Manchester as a chronological bible but if Taylor was in Dallas, then it's wrong. Ditto McNamara's book. He may have been "advised" to skate around the critical points in time and come up with a different but plausible story. Widespread poetic license?
-
fascanating subject, Carol - one I've wondered about but never looked into - other than NO debriefing upon his return to the continental US - I'll be interested in any followup...
David Healy
This stinks. A Marine with U-2 radar codes and Atsugi Air Base classification decided to go to Soviet Russia. He goes over, spends two years in the heart of
Minsk industrial center, then COUNTER - DEFECTS back to the United States.
He is never debriefed and never watched as a possible Soviet spy?
This reeks of a counter intelligence program.
Lee Harvey Oswald was a noisy self proclaimed Communist, but when he supposedly kills the President of the United States, he denies it until he dies.
A communist radical militant would have claimed the "glory" ....
An effective US security force would have monitored him and prevented him
being at an open window over a Presidential motorcade.
I believe Oswald was a Marine Intelligence / ONI asset, who was manipulated to go to Russia, controlled after he came back and used as a handy "burncard"
when a patsy with COmmunist credentials was needed by the agencies.
He was served up to public consumption with the backyard photos and the
crime was "solved"
Then he was murdered and thus became a "lost" assassin, in the jargon of the
1953 CIA assassination manual.
Poor bastard, I feel sorry for him, his wife Marina and his girlfriend Judyth.
He probably thought he was serving his country.............
Shanet,
I agree. LHO was fried without a moments hesitation, while thinking he was doing an important job. His family problems were not incriminating, they were irrelevent. Murdered, then thrown into the annals of history as an evil assassin. Shameful.
-
Tim, I believe you're wrong and you're wrong. No matter how you dress it up, you believe Communists are evil, hence must be behind the assassination. I believe other researchers, having discovered this, give your opinions a lower value. I give them none. It's an unsolved crime ("the" crime) that's being researched here--you have to be objective or you can't get anywhere.
I'm no advocate of Communism, the number of benevolent Communist Governments have been vastly outnumbered by repressive, tyrannical ones. However, when you look at the evidence pertaining to this unsolved crime you discover that it doesn't make any sense for the Soviets or Cuba to kill JFK. Are you doubting that the Communists learned why the BOP failed? Or that they knew JFK was unpopular with the CIA? JFK's shaking up the very sectors of the US elite whom Communists despise, so the Communists then devise an audacious plot to kill JFK? That doesn't even half make sense.
You should be debating the evils or otherwise of Communism in a political forum, not this one. This crime will never be solved by forcing political parameters onto its solution.
-
I agree with Bernice. To think that the SS failure in Dallas was just a few errors in the heat of the moment is to badly misinterpret the evidence. These agents were highly trained in protection and the agents under suspicion (Greer, Roberts and Boring) were experienced agents, not beginners.
On the question of Lansdale or Taylor, it looks scarily like Taylor. The only problem is that it would mean Manchester was wrong. Was he fed incorrect data by someone or was he right?
-
Subscribers to the 'Polish Jew as Jack the Ripper' theory usually fall into the category known in Ripper circles as 'Andersonites'. This is not a derogatory term as many of the theories carry their own nomenclature (another is 'Druittists') and as theories go the 'Polish Jew' is as good as any. Assistant Commissioner (Crime) Sir Robert Anderson stated, more than once, that the identity of the Ripper was known and that he was a Polish Jew. From hereon in things get complex and the arguments, pro and con, very lengthy.
As a result of Anderson's claims several informed and knowledgeable authors and researchers have followed the 'Anderson line' believing that it is the only 'official police clue' that might possibly lead to the identification of the murderer. Amongst those involved in this research (and who have carried out extensive genealogical research into various named Jews involved in the case) are Mark King and Scott Nelson.
The name of Levy pops up in relation to the murder of Catherine Eddowes in Mitre Square in the early hours of Sunday 30 September 1888. One Joseph Levy was one of three Jewish witnesses leaving the Imperial Club in Duke Street, City, around 1.35 a.m. who saw a man and a woman talking at the entrance to Church Passage (leading into Mitre Square) only 10 minutes or so before the body of Eddowes was discovered. It is generally accepted that the man and woman were the killer and his victim.
Research revealed another Levy, Jacob, born in Aldgate in 1856 and who died in an asylum of softening of the brain as a result of syphilis in July 1891. From the few known facts speculation takes over, runs rife, and a new Ripper suspect emerges. In common with ALL other Ripper suspects there is nothing so vulgar as hard evidence to connect him with the murders. All the available information may be found on the Casebook: Jack the Ripper site at http://casebook.org/ and it really is a case of picking your preferred line of inquiry when deciding whether you think that the Ripper may be identified or not.
Stewart,
Thanks for the help re Levy. Welcome to the forum, btw--your knowledge of the case is certainly more extensive than mine.
I like Levy, if what King says is accurate, because of his personal circumstances more than anything else. His age, occupation, physical description, wife's alleged comments about his habits and behavior, period of incarceration prior to the killings and eventual death from syphillis seem like a perfect fit. The only problem is lack of additional information. It's been 117 years, so I guess there's no hurry.
-
Has anyone attempted to interview Edward Kennedy about the assassination of his two brothers. I have heard that he was informed by Robert Kennedy soon after the assassination of JFK who was behind the conspiracy. This was confirmed by the visit of Grant Stockdale on 26th November, 1963. As the conspirators were in a position to blackmail the Kennedys into silence, it was decided to wait until RFK became president in 1968 before all was revealed. Edward still refused to come forward with what he knew. Was he also waiting until he became president before he told the American public the full story. This might explain why he has never done this:
John,
Interesting stuff on the Chappaquiddick thread. Assuming it's accurate, there's always a chance Ted will tell all. He might find an inventive way of revealing it. Hope I live long enough.
-
Has Ted Kennedy ruled out ever running for President?
Somebody else ruled it out for him: the American public. Teddy's one of the longest serving Senators in U.S. history. He's not gonna drop his drawers and kiss up to the Bible belt.
Pat,
Yes, I knew it would be a longshot, but I thought I'd just throw it in
. I read in The Economist that he's been a longtime critic of the pharmaceutical industry, which indicates that he doesn't fear speaking out against power groups. I like that, although alienating powerful political lobby groups will never get you into the White House. I hope the Democrats find someone more impressive than the last lot of nominees. -
Has Ted Kennedy ruled out ever running for President?
-
Greg,
Great article. I read that the US Military is now offering a 40K sign on fee. It's desperation time. You can't let them do this of course and the blame lies squarely with the US Govt. It seems like there's no civilian government in the US, it's more like a Pentagon/White House Government with the Pentagon the senior partner. Been that way since about 1963.
Iraq will bleed Washington dry. The US is already heavily in debt. Then there's oil. The US consumes 18 million barrels a day, while Japan is second, consuming about 4.8 million barrels. China and India are increasing their consumption rapidly, causing the price to rise with no realistic limit, since it's a rapidly dwindling non renewable resource. The economies of all countries are, to differing extents, built on oil. The US economy is by far the most exposed to oil price shocks. China, Japan, South Korea and India all have strong economies but are less exposed to oil price rises because of their much lower consumption. The EU also threatens the US economy. The only two alternatives which will prevent a US economic collapse are to rapidly find a way to decrease oil consumption or to move into the Middle East and secure oil for the next fifty years. All this and George Bush till 2008.
-
Steve,
It's been a while. I've been involved in heated debates over on the JFK threads (it's a bear pit over there).
Anyway, I've been attempting to gather info on Jacob Levy but there's precious little info online (maybe I'm looking in the wrong places). I'm wondering if anyone
would know where I could find any additional info. Also, what do Stewart and Christopher think of Levy as JTR ?
Mark Hi, I will email Stewart, & Chris,and ask them to pass on any relavant info to you.Stewart has the most extensive collection of Ripper memorobilia in the world, we live about 10 miles apart, and he has invited me to use his files for research( Read it and weep.)Your right about JFK threads, im currently "debating"with Mr Gratz myself.
Regards, Steve.
Steve,
When you're through, send the files over here would you?.
-
Shanet,
I can assure you that persons who share my value system would have NEVER made a deal with the Mafia.
In my opinion, the Mafia is about as close to evil incarnate as can be. I would make no moral distinction between the Mafia and Communists with respect to their total lack of morality and willingness to kill.
It is interesting to me that Richard Bissell, who helped initiate the Mafia plots, was a Kennedy supporter. And of course it is well known that Jack Kennedy's father made a deal with the mafia that secured Kennedy's presidency.
I believe our country paid a terrible price for the bargain men like Richard Bissell and Joe Kennedy made with "the devil". That is true whether or not Jack Kennedy was aware of the deal made by the CIA or was aware of the deal made by his father.
Tim,
This is fundamentalist stuff. You see the mafia and the communists as evil, therefore they must have killed JFK. You've brainwashed yourself into believing this.
-
Steve,
It's been a while. I've been involved in heated debates over on the JFK threads (it's a bear pit over there).
Anyway, I've been attempting to gather info on Jacob Levy but there's precious little info online (maybe I'm looking in the wrong places). I'm wondering if anyone
would know where I could find any additional info. Also, what do Stewart and Christopher think of Levy as JTR ?
-
I should add that, like John, I believe that any documents released through declassification would not necessarily lead us to the conspirators. There's been so much time for incriminating documentation to be removed or falsified.
Hi Mark-
You're right in that there's certainly no smoking gun just waiting to be declassified. Still, who knows what possibilities we might be able to explore. Or eliminate. Declassification of the remaining documents certainly wouldn't answer all the questions or definitively solve the case. I guess it's more the principle of the thing: I feel entitled to to view those documents.
You hit upon a key point: If it could be shown that the classification was activated in the context of a threat to national security that no longer exists, then such an excuse for keeping the docs secret becomes unavailable. But I guess it comes down to who exactly would be making that determination.
What national security issues could still be relevant in 2005? Most of those involved are probably dead. The Cold War is over. The Soviet Union no longer exists. Communism, as a threat to capitalism, is very much dead. The only national security issue is that the truth would implicate elements of our federal government resulting in a Constitutional crisis, the implications of which would be staggering.
Greg,
Agree. The current threats to U.S. National Security are different to those in 1963. It's no surprise that the Government whitewashed the assassination. Besides protecting the real assassins, it ensured there would be no widespread public examination of its' security agencies. At the height of a cold war, this would have been very unwise.
-
I should add that, like John, I believe that any documents released through declassification would not necessarily lead us to the conspirators. There's been so much time for incriminating documentation to be removed or falsified.
-
Interesting, John.
What if a list of all such still classified documents were assembled and a "full court press" was undertaken to force their release?
Who is responsible at this time to make the decision whether to release the documents? I suspect in most cases it is the agency that generated the documents. But who decides (before judicial intervention) whether HSCA records should be released?
Hi Tim-
That's a great question. Generating a list of all such still classified documents, just as you suggest, and perhaps organizing them in a database such as MC Access, would be the first step.
Determining who within the government has the authority to release such documents is step two.
Step three: We get as many people as we can to write to their Congressman, write to their Senator, and write to this as yet undetermined person of authority with the list attached and demand that these docs be released.
I know this probably sounds naive and idealistic, but I think it's worth the effort. Although I have no idea how to begin generating such a list. Any suggestions there? The list would be the difficult part.
Once it's compiled, we can use it to generate support and get people to write. Maybe if enough people regularly bombard their elected officials with such a request, perhaps over time someone in a position of authority will address the situation. At the end of the day, those records belong to the People. They're ours. We own them. We pay for them to be kept locked away. OK, I know that's incredibly naive, but it just ticks me right off.
The U.S. government keeps re-opening these civil rights cases from the 60's, U.S. v. Cecil Price et al. ("Mississippi Burning" Trial) being the most recent. While I think that's a great thing, it angers me that the Kennedy murders and MLK's killing are still being ignored.
So, how would one go about compiling such a list? Any ideas?
Greg,
I sympathise with your frustration. Regarding your suggestion, this is probably naive but couldn't you write to the Justice Department for example, and request such a list.
Regarding step 2, the situation in Australia is the declassification would be announced by the Attorney General (after recieving Cabinet approval, of course). So basically it's the Government of the day who decides what to declassify.
The real key, IMO, is to strenghen the provisions of the AARB to overide the National Security provisions in certain circumstances, this being the stumbling block for declassification. Tim would probably know better than me, but this would require an application to the Court, in the absence of a willing Government. If it could be shown that the classification was activated in the context of a National Security environment which is now defunct (which is true), then, barring Government interference, the case could be won, IMO.
-
John, I read he was cowering, hiding in a restroom aboard Air Force One he was so certain there was a conspiracy and he was also targeted.
Tim,
It would be understandable that LBJ was nervous. Remember, those hearings were going on in Washington re Billy Sol Estes et al which had the potential to put LBJ behind bars. He was gambling all or nothing so he was entitled to be nervous--I'm sure those reports of him cowering alone were correct. Basically, his life was on the line--but not from a bullet.
Fabulous Article
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
John,
Welcome to the Forum. We've almost got every state in Australia covered now. That list interests me also, although just the names of those comprising their leadership (in addition to Johnson) would be interesting. I didn't think there would be so many on the DCC, it's more like a Forum.