Greg Wagner

I just picked up a Kindle edition and look forward to diving in today.

The lovely and talented Anita Diaz Silviera, AKA Mirta Dortico, perhaps? http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110428/ap_on_re_us/us_rfk_assassination Convicted RFK assassin says girl manipulated him LOS ANGELES – Convicted assassin Sirhan Sirhan was manipulated by a seductive girl in a mind control plot to shoot Sen. Robert F. Kennedy, and his bullets did not kill the presidential candidate, lawyers for Sirhan said in new legal papers. The documents filed this week in federal court and obtained by The Associated Press detail extensive interviews with Sirhan during the past three years, some done while he was under hypnosis. The papers point to a mysterious girl in a polka-dot dress as the controller who led Sirhan to fire a gun in the pantry of the Ambassador Hotel. But the documents suggest a second person shot and killed Kennedy while using Sirhan as a diversion. For the first time, Sirhan said under hypnosis that on a cue from the girl he went into "range mode" believing he was at a firing range and seeing circles with targets in front of his eyes. "I thought that I was at the range more than I was actually shooting at any person, let alone Bobby Kennedy," Sirhan was quoted as saying during interviews with Daniel Brown, a Harvard University professor and expert in trauma memory and hypnosis. He interviewed Sirhan for 60 hours with and without hypnosis, according to the legal brief. Sandi Gibbons, a spokeswoman for the Los Angeles County district attorney, said prosecutors were unaware of the legal filing and could not comment. The story of the girl has been a lingering theme in accounts of the events just after midnight on June 5, 1968, when Kennedy was gunned down in the hotel pantry after claiming victory in the California Democratic presidential primary. Witnesses talked of seeing such a female running from the hotel shouting, "We shot Kennedy." But she was never identified, and amid the chaos of the scene, descriptions were conflicting. Through the years, Sirhan has claimed no memory of shooting Kennedy and said in the recent interviews that his presence at the hotel was an accident, not a planned destination. Under hypnosis, he remembered meeting the girl that night and becoming smitten with her. He said she led him to the pantry. "I am trying to figure out how to hit on her.... That's all that I can think about," he says in one interview cited in the documents. "I was fascinated with her looks .... She never said much. It was very erotic. I was consumed by her. She was a seductress with an unspoken unavailability." Brown was hired by Sirhan's lawyer William F. Pepper. Pepper's associate, attorney Laurie Dusek, attended the interviews. and Brown said in the documents they both took verbatim notes because prison officials would not let them tape record nearly all the sessions. Sirhan maintained in the hypnotic interviews that the mystery girl touched him or "pinched" him on the shoulder just before he fired then spun him around to see people coming through the pantry door. "Then I was on the target range ... a flashback to the shooting range ... I didn't know that I had a gun," Sirhan said. Under what Brown called the condition of hypnotic free recall, he said Sirhan remembered seeing the flash of a second gun at the time of the assassination. Without hypnosis, he said, Sirhan could not remember that shot. Pepper, a New York lawyer with an international practice, previously tried to prove that James Earl Ray was not the assassin of Martin Luther King Jr. The lawyer said he is convinced that Sirhan was a victim of a mind control project such as those used by the CIA in the 1960s. He is seeking an evidentiary hearing to exonerate Sirhan in Kennedy's killing. Dusek said in an interview that Sirhan was hypnotized for perhaps 30 percent of the interviews, most of which had to be done through a glass partition with Brown talking to him on a phone. Only when Sirhan was moved from the state prison at Corcoran to his current location at Pleasant Valley State Prison in Coalinga were they allowed face-to-face visits, she said, and a few of those were recorded. Other portions of the motion allege suppression of ballistics evidence and the autopsy report, and claim ineffective assistance of counsel. It contends previous lawyers for Sirhan accepted from the start that he was the lone shooter, settled on a defense of diminished capacity and did not seek other avenues of defense. During the trial, Sirhan tried to confess to killing Kennedy "with 20 years of malice aforethought," but the judge rejected the blurted statement. A large portion of the new documents seek to prove the bullets that hit Kennedy came from a different direction than the spot where Sirhan was standing. The papers do not name any other possible shooter. Sirhan was denied parole in March by a panel that said he had not shown sufficient remorse for the killing.

Hi Jim. Thanks for sharing your work. Does the above prove that there is more than once source film? Or is it simply highlighting different versions (different formats and generations, for example) of the same original film? Over the years I've read accounts of people who've seen different versions of Z and of altogether different films of the assassination. Does anyone know if these accounts have been listed/cataloged (who, and what they saw) anywhere? I tried searching the Forum, but didn't find anything.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41060427/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/ By Lauren Keiper Reuters updated 2011-01-13T18:54:48 BOSTON — Thousands of documents, photos and even recorded phone conversations of President John F. Kennedy are going online and available to a whole new generation of high-tech armchair historians. The online digital archive of the 35th U.S. president was being unveiled on Thursday by the John F. Kennedy Library and Museum in Boston. Now, instead of having to travel to Boston, historians and the general public alike will have online access to 200,000 document pages, 1,200 individual telephone conversations, speeches and meetings and 1,500 photos. "For young people today, if it isn't on the Internet, it doesn't really exist," said library director Tom Putnam. "I hope this brings him alive to a new generation of Americans. (It offers) a fuller sense of the man." It took four years to digitize the artifacts, photos and videos, and the process is ongoing, said Putnam. He called the collection "the largest and most sophisticated digital presidential archive in the nation." A team of nearly two dozen people scanned Kennedy's professional and personal records and tagged all key data, Putnam said. Four major technology firms were involved. EMC Corp. donated high-speed storage, Iron Mountain contributed secure computing facilities, AT&T provided hosting and networking for the new collection and Raytheon spearheaded project management. The digital archives ensure that important documents are backed up electronically in high resolution, should anything happen to the physical records, Putnam said. The Kennedy library website typically garners 3 million hits a year, a number Putnam said he expects to increase substantially after the launch of the digital archives. A previous special exhibit about the historic moon landing and Kennedy's efforts to advance the space program saw 8 million hits in a matter of days, he said.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/uk/Who-killed-JFK-Nixon-Johnson-CIA-were-suspects/articleshow/7096573.cms Who killed JFK? Nixon, Johnson, CIA were suspects PTI, Dec 14, 2010, 05.58am IST LONDON US president John F Kennedy's assassination in Texas in 1963 has long been the subject of conspiracy theories. A list, prepared by his former secretary 47 years back and made public now, has named Richard Nixon, the then vice-president Lyndon Johnson, the CIA and Communists, among others, as suspects. The never-before-seen list, which was made by Evelyn Lincoln as she flew home on Air Force One immediately after JFK was gunned down, is to go under the hammer in Connecticut on Thursday and expected to fetch more than $40,000. Lincoln was, in fact, riding in the motorcade with JFK when he was shot dead by Lee Harvey Oswald in Dallas. She jotted down names of people she suspected could have been behind the killing, starting with Lyndon Johnson. The note also listed "the KKK, Dixiecrats, (Teamsters boss Jimmy) Hoffa, Nixon, (South Vietnam President Ngo Dinh) Diem, CIA in Cuban fiasco."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40649870/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/ Cuba launches Wikipedia-like online encyclopedia EcuRed depicts the U.S.-Cuba story differently than other online sources HAVANA — Cuba has begun its own online encyclopedia, similar to Wikipedia, with the goal of presenting its version of the world and history. It describes its longtime ideological enemy, the United States, as "the empire of our time" and "the most powerful nation of all time." EcuRed (www.ecured.cu) will be launched officially on Tuesday, but it was already up and running on Monday, with 19,345 entries. It was developed "to create and disseminate the knowledge of all and for all, from Cuba and with the world," the site said. Users supposedly will be able to update entries with prior approval from EcuRed administrators. "Its philosophy is the accumulation and development of knowledge, with a democratizing, not profitable, objective, from a decolonizer point of view," the site said. Cuba and the United States, where Wikipedia was created, have been at odds since a 1959 revolution put Fidel Castro in power. EcuRed's entry about the United States said it had historically taken "by force territory and natural resources from other nations, to put at the service of its businesses and monopolies." "It consumes 25 percent of the energy produced on the planet and in spite of its wealth, more than a third of its population does not have assured medical attention." About U.S.-Cuba relations, it said from early on, U.S. leaders looked upon Cuba "like those who admire a beautiful fruit that will end up falling in their hands." EcuRed contains an extensive biography of former Cuban leader Fidel Castro, including his role after the illness that made him cede power to brother Raul Castro in 2006. "Today he writes and participates in the struggle of ideas at a global level. For his moral authority, he influences important and strategic decisions of the Revolution," it said. There is also an article about Raul Castro, who officially replaced his brother as president in 2008 and is described as a "revolutionary combatant, political leader, statesman and military chief." "He has contributed relevant support to the struggles of the Cuban people in defense of their sovereignty and independence," said the entry. EcuRed does not yet include mention of economic reforms introduced this year by President Castro to update the Cuban socialist model and that are currently the object of a national debate. According to a government survey conducted earlier this year, about 1.6 million Cubans, out of 11.2 million population, have access to the Internet.

The fact that so many of the witnesses on Elm ran up the hill toward the fence and claimed to have heard shots from that area, coupled with the fact that no reliable evidence or witness can put Oswald in that window at the time of the shooting. There are several other items that are quite convincing, but that's the most obvious to me.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/russ-baker/peculiar-posner_b_695710.html Peculiar Posner by Russ Baker August 26, 2010 At first glance, I thought my eyes were deceiving me. Here's a complaint letter to the editor published in The New York Times, from a man representing the highly controversial brother of Afghanistan's president Karzai---and the letter-writer's name is Gerald Posner. Gerald Posner? Isn't that the same name as the investigative journalist who resigned from the website Daily Beast after allegations surfaced of serial plagiarism? (The Miami New Times also provided examples that Posner "seems to add, subtract, or misattribute quotes" and displayed a series of such "apparently altered or misattributed quotes.") The letter to The Times puts this Gerald Posner's location as Miami Beach---where the Posner in question happens to live, so yes, it does seem to be the right person. Assuming Karzai didn't prefer to hire some unknown Gerald Posner from Miami. Which raises some more questions. Why would Ahmed Wali Karzai hire Posner, of all people, to help clear his name? And why would Posner the journalist take what is essentially a publicity job representing this seemingly unpleasant and fraught fellow? Actually, Posner has been in a propaganda role before. But first, the letter. The Times ran it under the headline, Defending Karzai's Brother. It begins,I represent Ahmed Wali Karzai, the chief of the Kandahar Provincial Council and President Hamid Karzai's younger brother. In your Aug. 13 editorial, "The State of the War," you cite unidentified "American officials" to assert that "the younger Mr. Karzai is involved in the opium trade and other corrupt enterprises" as well as being "on the C.I.A.'s payroll." Posner goes on to suggest that there's no evidence on these counts. Then, he writes, Also, while he is a key partner with the Americans and coalition forces---having survived multiple assassination attempts himself---he adamantly denies being on the C.I.A. payroll. Here, the words "assassination" and "CIA payroll" caught my eye. Gerald Posner is perhaps the leading author in the world who has worked assiduously to convince Americans that Lee Harvey Oswald killed John F. Kennedy and acted alone. As if to ward off all the questions about what the CIA knew about the peculiar events leading up to and taking place on November 22, 1963, Posner titled his book "Case Closed." But even the House Select Committee on Assassinations concluded in its 1979 final report, fifteen years after the discredited Warren Commission Report, that in all probability there was some kind of organized effort to remove Kennedy: "scientific acoustical evidence establishes a high probability that two gunmen fired at President John F. Kennedy." It concludes " ...on the basis of the evidence available...President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy." Posner's work on the JFK assassination issue puts him essentially in the CIA's camp, by consistently leading readers away from a mountain of evidence regarding CIA connections with key figures in the story, including Lee Harvey Oswald. Posner plays a similar role with the assassination of Martin Luther King with his book, Killing the Dream: James Earl Ray and the Assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. Now, this journalist is suddenly doing p.r. work for a man accused of being on the CIA's payroll. Can anyone see a possible pattern here? For further insight, take a look at the reporting by Carl Bernstein (of Woodward and Bernstein fame) for Rolling Stone on CIA infiltration of US media, and maybe some of the fine books on Operation Mockingbird. Also, another curiosity. The Times waited six days from the date on the letter (which was presumably emailed, as is the custom these days), and then three days after publishing it came out with a blistering piece looking further at convoluted machinations involving the CIA and the Karzai family. (For comparison, note that on August 25 The Times published a letter dated August 25, so they can do so when they want.) Would be nice to know what's going on behind the scenes with all this.

When I consider the identifying of Lansdale in the Tramps photo by Prouty and Krulak, I think about the people that I see regularly in my workplace. If I were provided such a photo (same angle, distance, quality, etc.) of one of those individuals, I don't think I'd have any trouble making a positive ID. Prouty and Krulak seem quite confident in their identification of Lansdale in that photo, so I think the two most likely possibilities are that it is in fact Lansdale or it's not Lansdale but they're trying to implicate him for some reason (to sell Prouty's books, to divert attention if it's actually Taylor, etc.). So I believe it is a question of their credibility and motivation and I do not know enough about Prouty or Krulak to venture an opinion on that. If they knew Lansdale as well as it seems they did, then I think the least likely scenario, which I think would be most unlikely, is that they just got the ID wrong.

Hi Tom, Youve raised a couple good points. My thought is that IF you accept the fact that the print in question is that of Mac Wallace, then a plant is a significantly more logical conclusion than the alternative that Wallace was actually up there. Your idea that the Wallace print was placed into evidence as opposed to actually being lifted off a box at the scene makes sense to me. That would certainly be easier and it would be the only way to guarantee that the print got into evidence. You may be correct in your assessment of the difficulty in 1963 of the print in question leading to a quick or certain match. However, I would suggest that if the purpose of the plant was leverage (and what other motive could there be?), then maybe that didnt matter so much. They were simply attempting to coerce LBJ by illustrating that they had a way to tie him to the assassination if he didnt play ball. There would be no need for this print evidence to hold up at a trial. If someone convinces LBJ that the print exists as part of the evidence taken from the snipers nest, that ensures LBJ has a personal stake in protecting the actual perpetrators (who are presumably the same individuals that planted the print). Of course, the fact that the print in question exists is the only undisputed fact. You can make the argument that its fact that this is Wallaces print, based on Darbys assessment it simply comes down to which expert you believe. If one does not accept these two items as facts, then thats a debate that Im willing to leave to the fingerprint savants. However, if one accepts as fact that the print exists and that the expert evaluation of this print conclusively identifies it as Mac Wallaces, then it must be explained. And while the explanation is essentially supposition at this point, planting the print by placing it into the snipers nest evidence as leverage over Johnson to protect the perpetrators is the most logical explanation. If there are members who agree that the print in question exists and that it is Mac Wallaces but would suggest a different explanation, Id enjoy reading it. Or if my supposition just doesnt make sense, fire away and poke holes in it. Cheers, Greg

Based on what I’ve read of Darby’s work and its criticisms, I believe it’s Wallace’s print. I also think it’s clearly a plant. As others have stated, it is simply not rational that if LBJ had pre-knowledge of the assassination that he would have someone who could so easily be connected to him, like Wallace, anywhere near the event. And if Johnson did not have pre-knowledge of the assassination, why would the parties wishing to gain leverage against LBJ haul Wallace up there in person and arrange to leave exactly one fingerprint (good point, Thomas) as evidence? That would make no sense, especially when this could be accomplished without his presence or knowledge. The only way this print means anything is as a tool to gain some type of leverage over Johnson – whether he had pre-knowledge or not, someone felt that leverage was necessary. One of the ways this leverage could have been implemented is in ensuring that LBJ would order all the evidence into the custody of the FBI. This headed off any chance of a real murder investigation and paved the way for Hoover to control the “official” investigation and its outcome. “You know, Lyndon, they found Mac Wallace’s print up there in the sniper’s nest. If I were you I’d bring every scrap of evidence up to Washington where we can conduct an official investigation and sort this out. Otherwise, you know, you never know where this thing could lead.”

Hi John, There's not much info I can find on our friend CBC, but I'm still looking. Thanks for the photo.

So if I am connecting the the dots corrrectly, Capehart and Tony Izquierdo were both being handled by Hal Feeney who was ONI at GITMO, along with Jack Modesett. And this is the same Modesett who was approached by Zamka/Morales in May '62 regarding efforts to change national policy so the base could take a much more aggressive attitude toward Cuba. It fits well with the idea that Izquierdo was the Dal-Tex spotter and makes you wonder what Capehart was doing in the TSBD, if in fact he was there. Fascinating stuff... thank you!

Is there an account that someone could point me to that describes Dulles' appointment to the WC? I'm looking for something on LBJ's rationale for selecting him, was he recommended by someone to LBJ, etc. Thanks, Greg

Speculation of course, but beyond the larger issues of JFK's failure to fully support the exile cause and his increasingly softening approach to Castro, an additional motive for Morales, Vidal and possibly others to drive the assassination could have been a personal beef that grew out of this failed op. The December '63 attempts on Vidal, Hargraves and Collins could have been retribution and an attempt to ensure silence on the failed op. Which would add another rationale for the RFK hit in '68 and fits nicely with the Kennedy family's resistence to the Garrison investigation and their public stance supporting the WC findings. It would also be interesting to know the true circumstances around the Modesett Sr death and what exactly Zamka/Morales and Modesett Jr discussed. The whole thing sounds like a worthy area of research for anyone so inclined. Thanks for the info John.

No documents to back this up as it comes from members of the family so forum members can make of it what they wish. Before the so called aggressive action against Cuba was taken, Joe Kennedy instigated an operation with Felip Vidal Santiago at the helm. The plan was to get Kennedy's illigitimate child out of Cuba. Vidal failed and made a powerful enemy in the process. Kennedy allegedly told Morales to tell the Cubans they would never get their country back. He was not happy to say the least. Vidal was also not impressed. Could this have started the road to Dallas? Jack Modesett and Hal Feeney, two charaters who have escaped major scrutiny maybe need to be looked at. Feeney also handled Claude Barnes Capehart which begs several other disturbing questions. After Vidal was executed in Cuba, his widow received a personal phone call from LBJ offering his condolences. He spoke to her for some time. She never revealed the topic of their extended conversation. JK Hi John, I read somewhere (SWHT?) that in 1963 Vidal was spreading the word amongst the exiles of JFK's olive branch to Castro. If the above account is true, then the comment to Morales about never getting their country back would be consistent with JFK's efforts via Attwood and his overall attitude toward Cuba from October 1962 forward. When you say that, "Kennedy allegedly told Morales...," is that JFK or Joe? Do you happen to know the timing of the operation and the comment? This would also help explain the Kennedy family's silence on any notion of conspiracy. And one wonders what ever became of the child.

Brad Ayers mentions a few times in The Zenith Secret that the Administration was continually frustrating JM/WAVE personnel by micromanaging the operations and essentially making them less effective. If the JM/WAVE crew favored a different, more aggressive approach to their operations against Castro than the pencil necks in DC would permit, then it would make sense to me that Morales may have attempted to circumvent official policy and proceed as he saw fit. So, one could speculate that Morales was seeking ways to achieve more aggressive action against Castro outside of officially sanctioned ops. Given his position, Modesett would seem to be an excellent strategic partner in such an effort. Feeney being Izquierdo’s case officer and disappearing in mid-1962 – now that is interesting. That’s quite a little sewing circle these guys had going. The Modesett Sr. incident/connection is curious. Lots of room for speculation there.

Andy- You are clearly working for the CIA. In fact, I think I see you in one of the Altgens photos. It's all becoming very clear to me now. Yes...

Hi Duncan, It's difficult to say due to the age difference and the fact that one pic is a face shot and the other is a profile. It's funny that Chris mentioned W because I thought the same thing. W was 18 at the time of the murder.

Hello James, Nice to hear from you. When you ask if there "...is a chance these men are one in the same," my answer is yes. It looks to me like the man in the photo you posted is several years younger than the Houston & Elm figure. But in this novice's opinion, they certainly could be the same individual at different ages. Pretty interesting info - thanks for sharing it. Hope things are well with you. Cheers, Greg

I just watched the video - outstanding! Very funny and a good, common sense take on the ridiculous nature of the official conclusion.

Hi Harry, Is it your thought that LHO was involved/framed by those posing as CIA as opposed to actual CIA (i.e.David Atlee Phillips/Maurice Bishop)? Who was the financier to whom you refer? Thanks!

That's a very interesting angle Ron. Didn't Paul O'Connor mention that the body he saw at Bethesda was in a slate gray body bag inside a cheap shipping casket? If so, then this account obviously conflicts with the ornate casket, sans body bag, in which JFK's body left Parkland. Supposing for a minute that this two body scenario was part of the deal, it then begs the question: Who set-up and managed this shell game at Bethesda? It would be interesting if we could determine if any military brass were at Bethesda prior to the body’s arrival and when they got there.

Deleted double post.

IMO, it’s pure propaganda... nevertheless: The Culture of Conspiracy By JAMES PIERESON November 24, 2007; Page A11 This week is the anniversary of the tragic day in 1963 when John F. Kennedy was assassinated on the streets of Dallas. Looking back, we can see that Kennedy's death marked a turning point, when the political consensus of the time gave way to the confrontational politics that we associate with the 1960s. The upheavals that followed -- along with the bitter partisanship that disfigured political life in the last third of the century, and whose echoes we still hear today -- can be traced back to that day in Dallas. The terrorist attack of Sept. 11, 2001, is the only other event in the modern era that compares with the Kennedy assassination in terms of its shattering impact on public opinion. And there are parallels: The 9/11 attacks, like the Kennedy case, stimulated conspiracy theories claiming that either the U.S. government knew what was coming, or that somehow America itself was responsible. President John F. Kennedy and Jacqueline Kennedy riding in the backseat of an open limousine in Dallas, Texas, moments before his assassination on Nov. 22, 1963. Both events were expected to have unifying political effects -- but both soon gave way to intensifying periods of political conflict. The extreme rhetoric of the 1960s, in which leaders were cast as "war criminals" and America was spelled with a "k," is echoed today in claims that President Bush or neoconservatives lied or manipulated the nation into war. Opinion polls routinely show that more than two-thirds of Americans believe Kennedy was cut down by a conspiracy engineered by organized crime, the CIA or FBI, or right-wing groups upset by Kennedy's liberal policies. Most believe the Warren Commission covered up the truth by concluding Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone assassin. Such suspicions encouraged the conviction that the national government is corrupt and untrustworthy -- and also that the nation itself was in some way responsible for Kennedy's death. The reality is otherwise. As with the attacks of 9/11, events beyond the shores of the U.S. played a larger role in the Kennedy assassination than most Americans would like to believe; and President Kennedy, far from being a liberal idealist, was more of a practical reformer who never got too far out front of public opinion. Consider the Cold War and civil rights, the two great issues of his presidency. Cuba was the flashpoint of Cold War politics during his term in office. The Cuban Missile crisis, during which Kennedy induced the Soviet Union to withdraw offensive missiles from Cuba, gave him a conspicuous diplomatic victory in a most dangerous nuclear confrontation. Violence against civil rights activists across the South was the most pressing domestic issue in the months leading up to the assassination. In response to the escalating domestic tensions, Kennedy proposed a sweeping civil rights bill in June 1963. In response to the communist threat, he continued to look for ways to get rid of Castro in the wake of the missile crisis. But the meaning of the assassination in light of these two critical issues was completely muddied in the immediate aftermath of the event. National leaders and journalists interpreted it in the context of the civil rights struggle -- rather than the Cold War. And this utter misinterpretation has had a damaging effect on Americans' image of themselves and their country. Oswald was arrested by Dallas police within an hour of the assassination. The evidence against him was overwhelming. His rifle fired the shots that killed the president; spent shells from the rifle were found in the building where he worked; he was seen in that area before the shooting; witnesses on the street saw a man firing from a sixth floor window. Based on a description, a policeman stopped Oswald while he was walking in another section of the city. Oswald shot the policeman and then fled to a nearby movie theater, where he was captured. For those who weigh the actual evidence, there can be little doubt that Oswald was the assassin. However: Oswald was a dedicated communist who had defected to the Soviet Union in 1959 out of disgust with American capitalism. After becoming disillusioned with Soviet life, he returned to the U.S. in 1962. In early 1963, he bought a scoped rifle through the mail and soon used it to fire a shot (which missed) at retired general Edwin Walker, the head of the John Birch Society in Dallas. In the summer of 1963, Oswald was active in street demonstrations in support of Castro. In September 1963, he visited the Soviet and Cuban embassies in Mexico City seeking a travel visa that would allow him to travel to Cuba. Oswald was among the radicals of the time who saw Third World revolutionaries like Castro as the wave of the communist future. He was well aware of Kennedy's efforts to overthrow Castro's regime. As a Senate investigative committee suggested in 1975, Oswald shot Kennedy to interrupt his administration's plans to assassinate Castro or to overthrow his regime in Cuba. Ignoring Oswald's communist links, journalists and political leaders quickly claimed the president was a martyr to civil rights. Earl Warren said that Kennedy had "suffered martyrdom as a result of the hatred and bitterness that has been injected into the life of our nation by bigots." Martin Luther King said the assassination had to be viewed against the backdrop of violence against civil rights marchers in the South. James Reston wrote in the New York Times that "something in the nation itself, some strain of madness and violence, had destroyed the highest symbol of law and order." The consensus opinion was that Kennedy was a victim of hate and bigotry, a casualty of his support for civil rights. The Cold War and Kennedy's ongoing feud with Castro were rarely mentioned as factors behind the assassination. The reasons? Mrs. Kennedy wanted her husband remembered as a modern-day Abraham Lincoln. Lyndon Johnson feared complicating relations with the Soviet Union. Liberals feared a replay of the McCarthy period, when the Wisconsin senator inflamed public opinion about fears of domestic communism. Among the other reasons: Robert Kennedy did not wish to call attention to the administration's clandestine efforts to overthrow or assassinate Castro. J. Edgar Hoover, head of the FBI, feared that his agency might be blamed for incompetence if the public believed that a communist subversive had found a way to assassinate the president. This obfuscation -- which attributed the assassination to "causes" other than the real ones -- had far-reaching effects. The claim that Kennedy was a victim of the civil rights struggle gave rise to speculation about conspiracies that exonerated Oswald while pointing the finger of blame in other directions. The Soviet Union, along with the world-wide left, encouraged speculation that far right groups or the CIA were the true assassins. The suggestion, no less than the fact, that the assassin was a communist was unwelcome in many circles. If Oswald had been a reactionary rather than a communist, there would not have been the kind of wild speculations about who or what was responsible for the president's murder. Secretary of State Rice asked rhetorically a few years ago, "When will we stop blaming ourselves for 9/11?" A similar question might have been asked decades ago about the Kennedy assassination. In both cases the United States was attacked by avowed enemies, yet many were convinced that we had done it to ourselves. Mr. Piereson is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and author of "Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism" (Encounter Books, 2007).