James DiEugenio

I just remembered, the NY Review of Books also ran a long and interesting essay on Mexico City and Oswald. This was, IIRC, in the seventies, and it was, again, IIRC, co written by Bernard Fensterwald. Those were the days.

to your two points: 1. That is correct about him pointing out the obscene bias by the media against Garrison. And he was right, but did not know how correct he was. Phelan turned out to be a real government stooge in. more ways than one. 2. I don't think I can imagine something like this in the MSM today, at least not one this long, in depth, and honest. It tells you a lot about where we are and what happened.

Oh please. And Ben congratulates him. This is a clear attempt to hijack a thread for Karl's own agenda. Popkin's article was one of the best, if not the best, essay on what Garrison had developed early on. The only pieces I know of that can match it are what Bill Turner wrote in Ramparts. The only other one was Garrison's own interview in Playboy. Which is still worth reading today. What these articles did was, for the first time, go beyond the critiques of the Warren Report. They began to formulate an alternative to the LHO did it scenario. That alternative postulated that the Cuban exiles, in league with the CIA, had decided to take their revenge on Kennedy for the Bay of Pigs, and his failure to invade during the CMC. That alternative theory still carries a lot of weight to this very day. Though it has been augmented by a third force, the Mob as represented by Jack Ruby. And later on, Garrison did add them in. Richard Popkin did a lot of good work on the JFK case. His book, The Second Oswald, is relatively ignored, but I thought it was quite good for the time it was written. He was also the guy who alerted Dick Russell to who the heck Richard Case Nagell was. In fact, Nagell would probably have testified in New Orleans if he had not had a hand grenade thrown at him in NYC. Which he brought back to Garrison. If one reads this, one understands why the CIA and FBI decided to do what they did. Even though they knew Clay Shaw was Bertrand, was an intel agent, and he was lying his head off about everything.

To this day, as many times as I have written about it and read about it, this story is still shocking. In my opinion, it does not get nearly enough attention considering the horror of the crime, what the CIA did, and the immense aftermath of its impact. I quotes a very able writer on the subject, Jonathan Kwitny on the last. If we had supported Lumumba, which Kennedy wanted to do, the fate of Africa and Congo could have been much different. https://jamesanthonydieugenio.substack.com/p/kennedy-and-the-congo-the-battle

Here is a longer version of what happened when Sachs tried to reform the Russian economy after the successful attempt in Poland. Neither the Republicans under Bush 1, Or Clinton wanted to do what he had done in Poland. https://www.racket.news/p/a-true-shock-economist-jeffrey-sachs?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=8p9xl&triedRedirect=true Which proves my previous point, that the Neocons, by the late nineties had taken over both parties. The JFK of American University was completely forgotten..

Thanks to you both, and I never heard that song before. Ron, Part 2 will begin with an overview of Kennedy's policy in Africa and how it changed from Ike. Something that almost no one deals with. We will then get into the whole tragic fate of Patrice Lumumba. As Jonathan Kwitny wrote, he became the first modern hero in Africa by getting himself killed for his country's democracy. What most people forget, or do not know, is that he was freely elected and that was a republican government with a constitution. Per Kwitny, that could have been a great example for Africa. But Ike and Allen Dulles said, heck no. Patrice has got to go. And go he did. And they did not even tell JFK.

This is going to be probably a three parter at my substack. Its a relatively little discussed policy area which Kennedy broke from Foster Dulles on, re Lumumba. But I will go more into his whole attitude toward Africa. What LBJ and Nixon did in Africa caused not just a reversal but a disaster. https://jamesanthonydieugenio.substack.com/p/kennedy-and-congo-the-battle-for

Jeff is a candid critic of people like former Sec of State Albright who was well rewarded by Wall Street after her neocon tour.

Stone actually sent me this interview since he liked it so much. Then, another reader on my substack site sent it to me also. He said, Jim if you watch this, Sachs more or less agrees with Oliver. I liked it so much I did an article about Sachs. One of the very few high level academics who is not afraid to face the facts about JFK.

That is true as far as it goes. But it does not go far enough Denny. Biden has the opportunity to correct it. He did not. In fact Andrew Iler thinks what Biden did was worse. Just ask yourself, what kind of a guy with RFK's bust in his oval office and his portrait in his study--which Trump did not--more or less reverses the intent of the JFK Records Collection Act.

One of the best exposes you will see on the so called DNC hack. https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2020/05/13/hidden_over_2_years_dem_cyber-firms_sworn_testimony_it_had_no_proof_of_russian_hack_of_dnc_123596.html Here it is from the horse's mouth about HRC. And BTW, its even worse than this. https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/20/politics/hillary-clinton-robby-mook-fbi/index.html This is largely behind a wall, but Aaron Mate was one of the best on this issue and you can see how he disagrees with William. https://mondediplo.com/2019/05/02russiagate-end

William: That is really unfair and it shows both bias and lack of perspective on your part. Because you and so many others here are so anti Trump, you cannot see that the whole Russia Gate matter was in large part manufactured as a way for the Democrats to distract from the whole HIllary Clinton private server mess. I mean the Democrats financed the effort and Adam Schiff hid that fact. HRC was directly involved as can be seen through Wikileaks, and you can also see exposes of the matter in more than one place like CJR and Matt Taibibi. One of the reasons Elon Musk bought Twitter was to expose how the FBI and Biden suppressed this information. I mean when you have Max Holland jumping on the Russia Gate freight train to link it to JFK, does that not tell you something? Russia Gate was a hoax and the Dems paid for the Steele Dossier which was forensically worthless. And Schiff covered that up also.

Denny: Do you really think that I like Trump, or that I am going to vote for him, or will vote for him? Or have voted for him? Or would ever think of voting for this guy? That is just so off the wall it renders me speechless. Trump lost the last time out. And he is likely going to lose this time out. And both are fine with me. But I will be glad to use him as he loses. And I am really surprised that people do not see that advantage.

Here is my series on Harris, and you can see what she did on the RFK case at the end of Part one. Which I got from Lisa Pease. IMO, there is no better authority. https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/kamala-harris-our-accidental-candidate

Wrong William. I have been at work on this case for decades. I am not interested in the politics. I am interested in the results. Did you read Andrew Eiler's essay on what Biden did to the JFK Act? It was devastating. He pretty much reversed what was in the original act. Andrew concluded by saying, with what Biden did, we might never get the last of the documents out. Now, do you think Harris is going to reverse that decision? I sure don't. Not unless someone puts pressure on her to do so. Here is a good opportunity to do just that. You have Trump on film saying what he will do, with RFK Jr on the podium, who was the only person to bring it up. You now ask the opposition, "Ms. Harris, is not 61 years enough time for the American people to find out what is in the last of the secret documents? And why should the CIA have control of that fate?" I understand that most everyone here despises Trump and RFK Jr. That is pretty obvious. It is also irrelevant to the objective. Which should be declassification of every last piece of paper. Here is a tactical way to try and do that. And because of your animus for Trump and RFK Jr, you want to pass it up? Sorry, I am not on that train..

This completely misses the point. The point is he said it. Its on tape. So now we have two high profile people right there: Napolitano and RFK Jr. And how we have a way to get an Op Ed in say the WSJ. "Trump says he will declassify, what is Harris going to do in response?" Sometimes I really wonder about this community and its political instincts and acumen.

Its amazing to me how this ends up getting political. We now have two people on the record about this issue, Napolitano and RFK Jr. And we now have Trump saying in public in front of thousands of people that he will release the last of the JFK records. Thereby making it an election issue. Has Harris said that? If she has I missed it. Is this not a great opportunity to pressure her to do so? Q: Madame VP, Your opponent Donald Trump has made a pledge to declassify the last of the JFK records, a case that is now over 60 years old. Why can't you make that same pledge? A: Well, President Biden put together a transparency plan on this. Q: With all due respect, what Biden did was in some ways the opposite of what the law stipulated, namely that the archives be emptied by 2017. And if there were exceptions they had to be specifically named and described. Some experts say what Biden did was even worse than what Trump did back in 2017. Isn't enough enough? A: Well, this is something I will have to look at and examine. Q: Ms Harris, this issue is seven years old. You aren't going to do the same here as you did with the RFK case are you?

Its really curious to speculate about those Kelly/Callahan interviews. And why the podcaster decided to promote such a bad book. On Black Op Radio this week, I devoted about a half hour to the subject. Any lawyer, which Kelly was, could have sliced and diced this book. But Kelly chose not to. I speculate a bit as to why.

LOL, 😜nice one William. That one is as important as the Peace Speech. I have to add something here. As anyone who reads this can tell, I reference Don McGovern on it more than once. Bill Kelly once criticized me on this point for using what he called a "failed book". Well, I guess Posner's book is something I should have used a lot more since it sold well over 100,000 copies. And I guess none of my books are worth quoting since they did not sell anywhere close to that? Whew. I guess I should have used Norman Mailer/Larry Schiller on Monroe then? That sold about a million copies. But its pretty much worthless. And Mailer more or less admitted that.

To make something clear: What is going up is a republishing of my 2 part series on Harris from when she ran before. There will only be a brief new introduction to it. As per balance, I guess Larry does not read K and K very much. How anyone can say that we have not attacked Trump over the JFK Act is really mystifying. (But that's OK Larry, I do not take these things personally, as I am used to it.) But did anyone say anything during the last six weeks about what Harris did on the RFK case? I don't recall it if it happened. I don't even think RFK Jr. did.

Welcome, my series on her is going up soon at K and K.

Why would anyone think that Harris would do anything on the JFK case? That woman did all she could to keep the RFK case from being reopened when the late Bill Pepper petitioned to have it done so on new evidence. According to Lisa Pease, Harris even consulted with Mel Ayton to prepare her reply. Which is sort of like consulting with Gerald Posner or Gus Russo on the JFK case. Harris had a golden opportunity to have Pepper do for the RFK case what he did in the King case. There was never any chance it was going to happen. If she ever does an interview, I would hammer her on both counts.

I think this is a good way to pressure Harris. Unfortunately she does not do interviews.

One of the reasons they fear Bobby Kennedy. Smart move by Trump. +1 over Harris.

When we start trusting the major networks, or cable, on what happened to RFK jr, I mean please. GIve me a break. Secondly, if Lisa Pease knew that Biden had dementia years ago, are you really going to tell me that no one else in the White House did? But they thought they could slide by and hide it. They gambled and lost. Pelosi stepped in and said the farce has to stop.