Nathaniel Heidenheimer

Unless you help restore the true narrative! Hello. Do you know what projects are being undertaken to explain the significance of the assassination to new younger generations. So much is done to moat the wider historical significance from them, and turn it into triviality. If the 50th is without this component, it will be a disaster IMO. If it is merely seen as a visual battle in Dallas it will be a crushing defeat. I can already see that they are planning to frame it in terms of "Alex Jones Types" v. "The Left" etc. While I personally could care less about these labels, it DOES MATTER because it will prevent millions from seeing the history accurately and the implications for today accurately. Do you know of any people specifically interested in this angle? To too many of us it seems absurd to NEED to explain the significance. It is absurd, but it is also necessary. This is because most of post WWII history has been entirely exterminated from public consciousness in current, fascist America. There is no sense whatsoever, of the EVOLUTION of the national security state. If there is not an educational plan, and if the 50th just becomes an all the eggs in one basket One Day Media Event, it will fail dramatically, IMO, because we will be allowing the corporate eye to frame and win. The 50th must involve a massive educational effort to educate NEW People who DO NOT ALREADY UNDERSTAND ITS SIGNIFICANCE. This effort must place the assassination in an arc of post war history that ends in right now and explains it. Because the MSM is so profoundly compromised in the story of the assassination and coverup, any true counterattack must involve making the EYE itself (the MSM) the issue. This can only be done with a mass based internet plan with hubs serving as bases of operation. Just to provoke discussion about what I mean here, i will say the following, possibly annoying thing on account of Im good at it: I cannot understand anyone who can possibly take these current corporate elections , and Obama , the most efficient Republican president in the land right now, seriously. I mean, how can you on the one hand have a coup d'etat be denied from the public as actionable intelligence, and at the same time act like elections 49 years later will change anything at all. This disconnect amazes me. It is a disservice to uncovering the political truth of the assassinations, because being serious about the assassinations importance while at the same time taking the fake elections literally represents a political double life which hides the importance of the political killings in the rightward turn of the democrats, which has facilitated our current one party, good cop bad cop corporate selections. The Democratic party has moved right for 49 years in a row. Say it, or you are not helping anything.

----------- This is what I mean by going on offense. Right now we are just letting PBS get away with using CIA hacks. If we don't raise the cost nothing will happen. PBS and examples of media complicity are also a way that the assassination can be used wide-angle to show new audiences its continued relevance. Nothing shows media complicity better than the JFK assassination and that is why the new edition of Destiny Betrayed is so good.

The conflict within the Democratic party-- during the JFK admin. -- was expressed in terms of JFK's battle with the National Security Bureaucracy. Since these included the most dangerous moments in world history, and included many that still are only now beginning to be recognized such as just how close the US was to a nuclear first strike in the summer of 1961,it should not surprise us that left-liberals -- largely subsidized for their understandable but not forgivable timidity in the wake of McCarthyism-- should have failed to see inside the chrysalis. Later this conflict would be much more visible in the 1968 RFK campaign. To the extent that they ever mention it, today's Foundation Funded Fake leftists use the Clean with Gene ploy so politely offered by dry cleaning foundations and their friends in North Virginia.

I tried going to this article from a nyc public school computer. I am a US history teacher. So it is blocked by the corporate school system. I sure am free to read Bill, Noam and Amy though. Official propaganda and Official McLeftists. Same rightward ends.

"One of the main reasons that the left in America have not embraced the idea of a conspiracy behind the death of JFK is that they did not see him in 1963 as posing a threat to the status quo" Yes, this is largely true, IMO. The reason for this lag time in the left catching up to what was really going on btw. 61-63 is what I call the Violent Chrysalis phase of the National Security State. The President and the National Security State were in an ambiguous and conflictual chrysalis in these 3 years, because the NSS was a teeny bopper who had been growing up with an avuncular president -- but also one with whom it had conflicts-- in 8 of its first 13 years. So by the time JFK came around there was real conflict about who was going to make foreign policies the president or the NSS. Who would be the butterfly, who the protective coating? Veil, shower curtain in Psycho etc. Then Hitch turned the water hotter and we got the butterfly wings of Dulles and Helms. This Conflictual Chrysalis-- e.g. as expressed in the secret Excomm meetings, the Vietnam discussions and tons of other examples-- would not have been evident to the permissible "left" writers in Cold War America. They would have had only their literal paper models of the National Security Acs of 1947 and 49 to look at. Sometimes the dashboard just does not reflect the engine. Sometimes there's some wraslin in the chrysalis. It takes time for journalists to catch up to speed. Especially when they soon learn it can pay quite well to be slow.

"I agree there is no evidence that I.F. Stone and Carey McWilliams were in the pay of the CIA" "One minor concern is about the suggestion that I F Stone and Carey McWilliams of the Nation somehow got a warning from governmental officials about a Soviet conspiracy" In no way did I suggest that it would be necessary either for these journalists to be "in the pay" of the CIA or "get a warning from governmental officials about a Soviet conspiracy". I don't think they needed to. This needs further discussion and I will explain these points when I get a minute. In the meantime go back and look at what Fred Cook actually says about McWilliams response when Cook raised doubts about the WC.

If it is published in a """"left""""" publication in the year 2012, it is almost certainly not really left. Someone thought about the quo and made it the price of a thousand quids, because it was a 20 lane expressway traded for a one- lane blacktop. Foundations give to "left" publications in order to exert control over them. We don't know the quo in terms of a legal contract. But we can see it clearly enough, because the clearly leftward implications of learning the truth about the assassination are covered up most aggressively by ALLEGED leftists. That is why the quotation marks MUST be around leftists. To not put them there is the blindspot called Amerika.

. "Obviously the left did have means of producing and distributing information in media format. Generally it was to some degree 'underground'. This also ties in with JS's post on the left, but it is important enough of a perspective that it needs stating. The history of the left tends to be disseminated officially through means outside the control of the left yet the left maintains its own history." This is an important point, and captures the contradiction concisely. If the medium is the message and all you own is The Berkley Barb and the East Village Other, then just how much of a common denominator can one create? And though individualism and uniqueness can be fun, it can also be commodified and rapidly depoliticized, because politics is inherently a social activity that is based on the ability to build new common denominators that can contest other common denominators. Therefore , how sharp the Barb if it is so localized that it precludes an Encounter? And so much baby can be lost when the former is translated into magazines for the ubersnoot set. ------ BTW the title of this thread should, of course, read The ROLE of """"THE LEFT"""" in the Coverup of the John F. Kennedy Assassination

"Jason Epstein confessed to his work with the CIA in an interview with Frances Stoner Saunders in New York in June 1994. As he pointed out, he was a member of the Non-Communist Left and was only too pleased to take a strong anti-Soviet line in the books that he published: “Who wouldn’t like to be in such a situation where you’re politically correct and at the same time well compensated for the position you’ve taken? And this was the occasion for the corruption that followed.” (Who Paid the Piper? The CIA and the Cultural Cold War, page 346) Epstein helped to establish the New York Review of Books with CIA money. It came in via Jack Thompson, Executive Director of the Farfield Foundation. Epstein was a personal friend of Thompson and claims that he held the job under contract to the CIA for over a decade (page 243). Epstein told Stephen Spender, editor of Encounter, that the journal was being funded by the CIA. Spender told Epstein that he did not believe him. However, according to his wife, he knew as early as 1955 that it was CIA money. This supports CIA’s Tom Braden’s account. Lawrence de Neufville, who was Braden’s boss, commented: “Who didn’t know, I’d like to know? It was a pretty open secret.” (page 394)" _______ These most excellent points published by Mr. Simkin on another, tangentially related thread prove my point: that any significant "left" publication in post 1947 America (I use that year not reductively because of the CIA birth in the Dulles Wall Street Manger, but also because of the orchestrated, and , dare I say it, CENTRALIZED purge of the left from all organizations of civil society that occurred in that year) was permitted and subsidized only on a quid pro quo basis. Yes to variables a,b,c only on condition of no and with much more credible denials vis a vis variables x,y, z [those naughty variables]. This is a recipe for Infighting is US which is the name of a small chain of left fast food that briefly tried to compete with McDonalds before folding over a stone bridge above the Penn. Turnpike. No seriously folks. We recall Braden's comments about how certain CIA publications needed to be popped with MSM outing in 1967, because they had outlived their purposes. How interesting, then , that Encounter Magazine was outed as a CIA publication by the very New York Review of Books that, to some degree, had been designed to take its place! Now one cannot just rinse and repeat this process ad infin, so it is not herniating to speculate that it might benefit the CIA to allow the Review to grow a lil shaggy around the ears by 68, and appear to be on the edge of reservations. I mean you can't just pop n grow a new one forever. And even Walter Cronkite was criticizing Vietnam by then. Today the New York Review of Books is not exactly propelling the masses to the barricades. Indeed, Rennata Adler's glib Speedboat cynicism could be very useful in taming a formerly shaggy crowd and making them skip the rally to visit uncles in Bethesda. A quid pro quo "left" is ultimately only for rightist ends. That is so important otherwise a bad headline will only deepen the alienation the real left has re studying the Kennedy Assassination. This alienation was planned from the start, and was as important as a clip that didn't fit, or a shell too far. --- BTW the title of this thread should, of course, read The ROLE of """"THE LEFT"""" in the Coverup of the John F. Kennedy Assassination

________Well obviously I disagree. Media trickery is at the very heart of the case, and nearly at every instant. From local New Orleans press, to INCA, to Time-Life to the censorship of the 1967 CBS documentary, the facilitators of the crime were acutely aware of messages to get "the left" on board in the cover-up. So that planning did not involve merely facts of the hit but on mechanisms for controlling how different audiences perceived those facts. Witness how Earl Warren was brought on board. Witness the phone call with LBJ, Joe Alsop, and The Texas Inquiry guy, before the Warren commission was formed. Alsop plays the Texan like a top, arguing that Warren was necessary to keep, above all , the left from blatantly denouncing the Commission. How to control the left was as piquant and pressing an issue as anything to do with shooters, small planes, or Paines. Now I can understand if some might think my thread somewhat obnoxious after John's thread. Were the quotation marks really worth it? It was not my intention to mock or annoy anyone. I simply could think of no other way of highlighting the key point: that what society considers "left" is a product of a media system entirely controlled by rightists. What is offered as debate is really about what those rightists consider acceptable parameters, an acceptable "idea of the opposite". But that idea of the opposite is not fixed. It changes. At one point Mort Saul could get on national tv. Then he could not.

How can one make a an article called The Role of The Left in the Kennedy Assassination without considering what was was ALLOWED on the left and under what CONDITIONS? The left never OWNED media. The few outlets that were permitted were inherently rudders for steering audiences TOWARD some things that were to be CALLED "left" and AWAY from other things that were to disassociated from what most people eventually thought of as "left". The operation of this rudder was not done by leftists. In at least some instances we have evidence that it was done by people with clear connections to the national security state, which was 16 at the time of the JFK assassination. So to use the term Left without quotation marks around it can be either reification or failing to see the reification. Or neither. Frankly that word gets me dizzy, but it makes me feel special when I use it. If this point seems a bit too "top down" in its perspective, I would suggest that one might read more about US media history during WWII. BTW the title of this thread should, of course, read The ROLE of """"THE LEFT"""" in the Coverup of the John F. Kennedy Assassination

The point cannot be emphasized enough: the controlled left is not really left. It is quid pro quo publishing under cold war capitalist conditions. The net effect of quid pro quo left publications is rightward. That is why they are funded by Capitalist foundations.

I think there are a number of earlier shows e.g. 417 on MLK with James Douglass that could be used to really get huge jumps in numbers to the BOR site. These used to be free, but now only this years show are on archives. While I can understand Len's need to do what is necessary to run this GREAT SHOW, I often wish that I could post these threads around. I know they got a lot of hits when I posted them earlier. On another note I think that BOR could play the role of a good HUB for the 50th. By this I mean a place where not merely organizing is done but either Len or Jim could say "hey this is what we are doing this week to build audience, make links, explain the significance of the assassination to wider audiences, make links to non-FB sites , etc." If the hosts did this AS OPPOSED TO AN OCCASIONAL LETTER WRITER, the idea of momentum and hub building could grow. Internet links could be reinforced with wide numbers. We are up against all corporate media for the 50th. We need to at least build internet hubs, and a plan.

William I think that BOR is an incredible resource that should be spread around widely to non-experts. Look how I tried to contextualize it here for non-experts as a snag, to hook them and get them to listen to the show. Note, I do not here claim to have snagged well , just snagged. I feel incredible time pressure and try to make sure at least 50% of my time is spent posting links that could potentially make new folk curious. ------------" We as a society suffer today from what can only be called an extraordinary case of collective nuclear amnesia. A picture of the past has taken shape that has very little to do with what our nuclear past was really like. It is now often taken for granted that even in the 1950's nuclear war was simply 'unthinkable" as an instrument of policy; that nuclear forces were never usable and saved only to "deter their use by others"; and that the threat of "massive retaliation" was at bottom use pure bluff, because the United States would never be the first to launch a nuclear strike. This picture has taken shape because it serves important political purposes of both the left and the right, but one cannot immerse oneself in the sources for this period without coming to the conclusion that something very basic has been forgotten"--Marc Trachtenberg, History and Strategy. Now, with this in mind, read all the indexed references to General Curtis LeMay in Richard Rhodes Dark Sun and James Carroll's House of War. and with that in mind be sure to listen to the Black Op Radio show 569 in the black op radio archives, which has some simply fascinating info on the top dog of the Strategic Air Command in Omaha. He never asked his mom or anyone else permission for anything else and the newly released Air Force One tapes have clearly shown he lied about where when he got back to Washington DC on 11/22/63 ,where he was coming from, and how he got there, and who he was with. But nobody is perfect. Compare this to the coverage given these tapes on the Charlie Rose Show. (with BOR show 569 link) 569 is an INCREDIBLE INCREDIBLE SHOW. I HAVE LISTENED TO IT ABOUT 7 TIMES SO FAR.

Hi everyone. It is time to stop pleading with Big Media and, instead raise the costs of their collusion. Now how can we raise the costs? The problem so far is that the big media can GET AWAY WITH LYING without nearly enough cost in terms of the credibility among those who still watch it. That is why, part of our prep work for the 50 th has to be, IMO, showing the Big Media that we have the ability to raise the question of their credibility. Now why, for examples did JAMA jam their highly specialized -so people- will listen- to that small -but influential -opinion (specialized authority too) around -the -thanksgiving -chatter Journal? Because they could. They could repeatedly afford to lie about the doctor in Parkland because they knew that the only ones who would call their bluff would do so in highly specialized internet sites. Time to up the costs of collusion. EXAMPLE 1: RECENTLY I POSTED ON FB a picture of the Romney's cooking Big Bird for thanksgiving. along with said sillyness I posted this> " Why Obama won: They need PBS to keep selling us specials on Oswald narrated by CIA hosts with long paper trails. [Oswald's Ghost] This is the only show I have ever seen on PBS that actually DISCOURAGED viewers from further study!! The only onehttp://www.spartacus...FKjohnsonPR.htm http://www.spartacus...Kaynesworth.htm.

"U.S. Senate democrats argued feebly". We have Taxation Without Representation. At one point in history some citizens were able to recognize that this was not merely a day to day bummer, but an uberbummer. The problem is how do you get the enough to see the problem today, in terms of Today's Corporate Democrats function as the cowcatcher of the Republican's locomotive who only serve to prevent a real opposition to the Republican's agenda of raw corporate fascism. Today's Democrats share that agenda, because they can see what they are doing. Our entire Billionaire's Inverted totalitarianism is designed to depoliticize the fascist tendencies and make them seem like they are natural law, first cousins of gravity. The Assassinations and all of their media-narrative implications, are the best way of putting wrenches in that false gravity, because it shows the wrenches installed by fascism in the Enlightenment ideas that, children are told, legitimated the nation's founding. The problem is that not enough people SPREAD the knowledge, and not enough people let the media implications dangle. We have no representation. Nothing shows this better than bullets, and Lucent truths, when gravity took coffee breaks. We have done a horrible job of countering the compartmentalization of the human mind known as the internet and also known as Chris Mathews. I choose not to use the word apathy, even though that is the end product. I prefer to point out that the population has been in very pricey, graduate degree program in Learned Helplessness that has more to do with Harry Reid than their moms, although I could be overgeneralizing here.

NOTE THIS NEW HISTORY C-SPAN TV SITE CHANNEL. This is an opportunity. Go here and post threads galore on this thread and later every single day. We are denied the interstate highways of communications, where lies are sold on 24 lanes. We AT LEAST need to get off the dirt roads and hit some intersections in Springfield Missouri!!! REMAIN HERE http://www.c-span.org/History/Events/The-Presidency-Assassination-of-President-Kennedy/10737435460/ ONLY REASON THIS IS ALLOWED IS BECAUSE OF 48 YEARS OF LEFT GATEKEEPING HAS CONVINCED THE LEFT THAT THAT FOOTBALL AIN'T WORTH PICKING UP. In other words the Assassinations have become Alex Jonesized. Over my twitching and or recidivist liver(optional !) BE SURE TO TYPE COMMENTS RECOMENDING REAL BOOKS ON POLICIES, NOT JUST WHO DUNNITISHNESS. Anyone serious about bringing truth out will not ONLY post on specialized JFK sites. That is what is making us lose.

The erasing of the magic bullet from the vocabulary of those under 45 is a bigger deal than most realize. Soon only rightists will know it , and then foundation funded decoupling machine will have been successful. On the other hand more on the left are now seemingly more aware of left-gatekeeping. If you look at sites such as Common Dreams, which is almost exclusively inhabited by foundation funded quid pro quosters, the comments section about Gatekeepers lies , such as those of Chomsky, veers on 4 to one against the gatekeepers. So there has also been some progress. Four years ago it would have been four to one the other way around. I think there is growing awareness on the left that they have been manipulated. PIVOTAL MOMENTS IN MANAGING THE US LEFT TO KEEP THE UNITED STATES RIGHT 1. Walter Lippmann the Straights New Republic 1918-20 2. The CIA's "left" magazine called Encounter Magazine keeping transatlantic liberals tastefully discreet during t he formative years of the Cold War and Vietnam War (1950-1964) 3. Fred Cook, lead investigative Reporter for The Nation is sent to Finishing School by Cary McWilliams of the Nation as he naively attempts to write about the Warren Commission for the audience that was most necessary to keep tasteful with publications like the key Cold War liberal book The Paranoid Style of American Politics (published in January 1964) http://www.amazon.com/Nervous-Liberals-Brett-Gary/dp/023111365X

I am getting a lobotomy so I can vote for Obama.

Hello vigilants: About a week ago I posted a CTKA article mentioning Robert Loomis ' curious social relations with a dude wearing thick lenses who liked Orchids, Israel, and New Orleans commerce. Well suddenly all the yahoo and Google threads to either Loomis or Random House come up sorry link is no longer available.. or what ever that is supposed to say. Probably they will be fixed in a second so that I seem like a writhing loon, but many have likely been living on faith alone, along with Martin Luther.

wrong thread

Yes, the Le May revelations are stunning. What surprised me, somewhat, is that they were partly allowed across the media moan onto the Charlie Rose show when the Tulane>Rice Brinkley appeared on the show. That Brinkley is an interesting one to read. THere is lot's there... provided he buries the lead at least 8 feet an account of the New Orleans tides. See his bio of the first sec of defense and his non-refundable spelunking. Read between caves. Then contrast and compare that with the Black Op Radio show in which Douglas Horne appeared talking for three incredible hours about the new Air Force One Tapes and the Le May new flight revelations on 11/22. What if we posted THAT link with some background explanation onto some threads on the Amazon reviews which are getting so many looks right now and will be for the rest of the year? I bet the number of people turning onto Black Op Radio would turn Len's whole map red! I have a dream! http://www.blackopradio.com/pod/black569.mp3 ok link doesnt seem to be taking but its show 569 on the Black Op Archives.

Here is an example of a review WITH PRODUCT LINKS. PLEASE CLICK THIS UP ONTO THE FIRST PAGE. There are better written reviews, but the pointing towards better books are what is needed right now. AGAIN, CLOSE YOUR EYES AND THINK HOW MANY EYEBALLS ARE HITTING THE O'REILLY SEWAGE BOOK ON AMAZON RIGHT NOW. Turn the vomit into opportunity. That alchemy is called Product Links button. You can put these into Your review or you can put these product links into the comments on some of the other O'Reilly reviews that have sprouted in such abundance of late. ----------------------- 1.0 out of 5 stars Loosing time, wasting money, October 19, 2012 By JM "JMP" (France) - See all my reviews This review is from: Killing Kennedy: The End of Camelot (Hardcover) The corner stone of this book is this: Kennedy was killed by Oswald. End of story. How does O'Reilly know? Because he read the Warren Report. Fine. For a lone killer to have fired only three shots in the imparted six seconds, the Commission had to create the single-bullet theory: one bullet, seven wounds, two broken bones, one right turn, one left turn... So magic that the bullet is found in pristine condition on a stretcher. Are you ready to believe that? Well, in September 1964, two men were not. One of the seven Warren Commisison members, Senator Richard Russell had this (recorded) conversation with his good buddy, President Lyndon Johnson: RUSSELL: - The commission believes that the same bullet that hit Kennedy hit Connally. Well, I don't believe it. JOHNSON: - I don't either. Now, - If you want to know how the story was concocted, you might want to read : Breach of Trust: How the Warren Commission Failed the Nation and Why. - If you want some perspective on who killed Kennedy and why, ou might want to read : JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters - If you need a good dissection of the Warren Report, you could turn to : Accessories After the Fact (1967) or Biting the Elephant: The Warren Report (2009). - If you don't mind a little file chasing, you might want to venture into : Oswald and the CIA: The Documented Truth About the Unknown Relationship Between the U.S. Government and the Alleged Killer of JFK - If you want to know how does a well-sourced book looks like, you should read : Destiny Betrayed: JFK, Cuba, and the Garrison Case (Second Edition) One book remains to be written, though. I will be more than happy to contribute title and subtitle: BLINDING AMERICA The 1963-2013 propaganda campaign to keep Americans in the dark following the assassination of President Kennedy.

Yes it is odd. I posted a review with a product link to JFK and the Unspeakable. I posted one on the horrible Caro book too and it is still on the front page. But the one I posted On the O Reilly book was already off the page when I went there four hours later. Buried. Nobody ever had a chance to see it. Consider this: The Bill book has almost 270 reviews. That is more than JFK and the Unspeakable has had in more than four years. And the Bill book has been out about a week. This is what we are up against. Get off the reservation or you are giving up.

This must be responded to. The left cannot continue to hear the best lies. It does mater even if you are not on "the left" whatever the hell that means these days... and it means nothing precisely because of sewage like this Chomsky article. Jim an others I urge you to go to Chomskys page directly on Facebook and post it right where all his adoring fans can read it I have been posting stuff there for along time. I am too busy though I will try to help. I just wrote a long bad letter to Amy Goodman. I have a demanding job and a family so I need some help. We cannot allow this xxxx to go unanswered by the fake left. Otherwise EVERYONE WILL run with the "leftist chomsk's having removed all policy consequences of the assassinaton. Just so does Bill O'Reilly note Chomsky's worst book Rethinking Camelot in his "Sources"