The Crime of the Century

[Greg Burnham]

The Crime of the Century: The JFK Assassination...Or The Cover-up?

Events That Implicate LBJ in the Crime of the Century

By Gregory Burnham

2-January-2000

Was LBJ guilty of contributing to the "cover-up" of the truth? The answer to that question is, no doubt, an area where few dissenting opinions exist among those serious researchers of the JFK assassination. Most agree that he participated, if not co-orchestrated (with J Edgar Hoover) the cover-up of the century!

Furthermore, the main indication of LBJ's complicity is evidenced by the haste in which he changed the KENNEDY Administration's Policies, at home, and even to a much greater extent, abroad.

In a Democratic-Republic, like the United States, the "ELECTED" leader, is not the "only legally recognized" part of the Executive Branch of the Government. When the People vote and elect a President, we elect not just "the man or the woman" who will sit in the Oval Office. But, we elect the President's appointees to his new ADMINISTRATION, as well.

The "ADMINISTRATION" consists not only of individuals, (such as the four [4] members of the National Security Council: the President, the Vice President, the Secretary of State, and the Secretary of Defense; as well as the remaining Cabinet members, and many other individuals, appointed by the President are also a part of the "Administration" elected by the people), but also includes various "policies" that a President has implemented.

It is the RESPONSIBILITY of those that he appoints: to "administer, advance, and implement" his policies during LIFE OF THE ADMINISTRATION, (not ONLY during the life of "the president").

When a President dies in office the EXECUTIVE BRANCH of the U.S. Federal Government does not die in office along with him. His Presidency is over, but the health of his ADMINISTRATION is maintained by the integrity and loyalty of his successor... or it is not.

LBJ did not kill JFK....[presumptive]. He pulled no triggers, paid no contracts, supplied no weapons. But, he went one step better than that: LBJ murdered the duly elected "Kennedy administration" instead.

What this means, is that prior to LBJ having "won the right" to reverse the KENNEDY ADMINISTRATION'S policies, he was already of the mind set: "The king is dead; long live the king... blah, blah, blah." The transition was almost too even, too easy, too smooth.

What a Vice President is supposed to do after ascending to the vacated office of his predecessor, the late president, is to direct the ADMINISTRATION OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF THE GOVERNMENT according to the NSAM's (or their equivalent) and Executive Orders placed in effect prior to the death of the President. LBJ SHOULD have been finishing out JFK's term first, not beginning his own term, unless and until he was elected DIRECTLY by the people. Only then does he have the right to author new policy. This restriction, of course, does not apply to situations involving "clear and present danger" to the National Security of the United States or the safety of her citizens. However, no such situation existed. Therefore, lacking such a tangible cause, LBJ had no legitimate AUTHORITY TO ALTER THE COURSE JFK HAD SET IN MOTION. He did have the "usurped power" to change that course, but NOT the legal or moral authority to do so. But, that's exactly what he did.

Those who question JFK's intentions need to read the NSAM's and the many Executive Orders signed by him [JFK]. This is nothing new to those who work in Washington, but many would act as though such official orders mean little or nothing. They are wrong.

The policy of any administration is defined by the nature of the NSAM's (or their equivalent) and EXECUTIVE ORDERS signed by the president.

Point in case: JFK not only threatened to shatter the Central Intelligence Agency, but NSAM's 55, 56, & 57 had already accomplished cutting out the red tape that normally would hinder such an endeavor. His having fired Allen Dulles, General Charles Cabell, & Dick Bissell is evidence of his resolve. These three NSAM's were slowly being implemented from the moment after the "Bay of Pigs" fall-out until the day he died, (with full implementation to occur during his second term).

Therefore a decision was made: JFK COULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO ESCAPE ALIVE. -- He must be denied a second term.

NSAM 263, of October 11th 1963, clearly stated JFK's intention to withdraw 1,000 troops (of a total of 16,000) from South Vietnam by Christmas 1963 and withdraw ALL remaining troops by Christmas of 1964. But, he was dead 6 weeks after signing that document. On November 21st, 1963, the day before the assassination, JFK's National Security Advisor, McGeorge Bundy, signed his name on the bottom of the DRAFT of NSAM 273. Then LBJ officially signed it on November 26th, 1963. That document began the reversal of JFK's Vietnam withdrawal policy and ushered in the escalation of the longest war in U.S. history.

The fact that LBJ reversed several policies within 4 days of the assassination, (and within one day of the funeral) is disturbing, as is the fact that he had already begun to restructure the budget BEFORE the Congress went home for the winter break to accomodate the cost of the many changes to JFK's policy that he would soon be initiating, such as the escalation of the Vietnam Conflict into an all out war. That LBJ was informed by President Kennedy's Special Advisor on Natiional Security, Mr. McGeorge Bundy, while enroute to D.C. from Dallas aboard AF-1 within 60 minutes of the assassination that: "JFK was killed by a lone gunman..." is also disturbing. But, this isn't about Bundy...yet.

These items speak volumes about LBJ's role in the Crime of the Century.

Greg Burnham

Copy of original draft of NSAM 55 provided to this author courtesy Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty, USAF (Ret.)

Copy of original draft of NSAM 273 provided to this author courtesy Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty, USAF (Ret.)

Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:nsam55.jpg (JPEG/JVWR) (00006F14)

Edited May 17, 2010 by Greg Burnham

[John Dolva]

LBJ to Erhardt, dec 63, LBJ Ranch > (practically an order (paraphrased)) : you must focus more on latin america south america so we can focus on asia

[Michael Hogan]

The Crime of the Century: The JFK Assassination...Or The Cover-up?

Events That Implicate LBJ in the Crime of the Century

By Gregory Burnham

2-January-2000

Was LBJ guilty of contributing to the "cover-up" of the truth? The answer to that question is, no doubt, an area where few dissenting opinions exist among those serious researchers of the JFK assassination. Most agree that he participated, if not co-orchestrated (with J Edgar Hoover) the cover-up of the century!

Furthermore, the main indication of LBJ's complicity is evidenced by the haste in which he changed the KENNEDY Administration's Policies, at home, and even to a much greater extent, abroad.

In a Democratic-Republic, like the United States, the "ELECTED" leader, is not the "only legally recognized" part of the Executive Branch of the Government. When the People vote and elect a President, we elect not just "the man or the woman" who will sit in the Oval Office. But, we elect the President's appointees to his new ADMINISTRATION, as well.

The "ADMINISTRATION" consists not only of individuals, (such as the four [4] members of the National Security Council: the President, the Vice President, the Secretary of State, and the Secretary of Defense; as well as the remaining Cabinet members, and many other individuals, appointed by the President are also a part of the "Administration" elected by the people), but also includes various "policies" that a President has implemented.

It is the RESPONSIBILITY of those that he appoints: to "administer, advance, and implement" his policies during LIFE OF THE ADMINISTRATION, (not ONLY during the life of "the president").

When a President dies in office the EXECUTIVE BRANCH of the U.S. Federal Government does not die in office along with him. His Presidency is over, but the health of his ADMINISTRATION is maintained by the integrity and loyalty of his successor... or it is not.

LBJ did not kill JFK....[presumptive]. He pulled no triggers, paid no contracts, supplied no weapons. But, he went one step better than that: LBJ murdered the duly elected "Kennedy administration" instead.

What this means, is that prior to LBJ having "won the right" to reverse the KENNEDY ADMINISTRATION'S policies, he was already of the mind set: "The king is dead; long live the king... blah, blah, blah." The transition was almost too even, too easy, too smooth.

What a Vice President is supposed to do after ascending to the vacated office of his predecessor, the late president, is to direct the ADMINISTRATION OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF THE GOVERNMENT according to the NSAM's (or their equivalent) and Executive Orders placed in effect prior to the death of the President. LBJ SHOULD have been finishing out JFK's term first, not beginning his own term, unless and until he was elected DIRECTLY by the people. Only then does he have the right to author new policy. This restriction, of course, does not apply to situations involving "clear and present danger" to the National Security of the United States or the safety of her citizens. However, no such situation existed. Therefore, lacking such a tangible cause, LBJ had no legitimate AUTHORITY TO ALTER THE COURSE JFK HAD SET IN MOTION. He did have the "usurped power" to change that course, but NOT the legal or moral authority to do so. But, that's exactly what he did.

Those who question JFK's intentions need to read the NSAM's and the many Executive Orders signed by him [JFK]. This is nothing new to those who work in Washington, but many would act as though such official orders mean little or nothing. They are wrong.

The policy of any administration is defined by the nature of the NSAM's (or their equivalent) and EXECUTIVE ORDERS signed by the president.

Point in case: JFK not only threatened to shatter the Central Intelligence Agency, but NSAM's 55, 56, & 57 had already accomplished cutting out the red tape that normally would hinder such an endeavor. His having fired Allen Dulles, General Charles Cabell, & Dick Bissell is evidence of his resolve. These three NSAM's were slowly being implemented from the moment after the "Bay of Pigs" fall-out until the day he died, (with full implementation to occur during his second term).

Therefore a decision was made: JFK COULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO ESCAPE ALIVE. -- He must be denied a second term.

NSAM 263, of October 11th 1963, clearly stated JFK's intention to withdraw 1,000 troops (of a total of 16,000) from South Vietnam by Christmas 1963 and withdraw ALL remaining troops by Christmas of 1964. But, he was dead 6 weeks after signing that document. On November 21st, 1963, the day before the assassination, JFK's National Security Advisor, McGeorge Bundy, signed his name on the bottom of the DRAFT of NSAM 273. Then LBJ officially signed it on November 26th, 1963. That document began the reversal of JFK's Vietnam withdrawal policy and ushered in the escalation of the longest war in U.S. history.

The fact that LBJ reversed several policies within 4 days of the assassination, (and within one day of the funeral) is disturbing, as is the fact that he had already begun to restructure the budget BEFORE the Congress went home for the winter break to accomodate the cost of the many changes to JFK's policy that he would soon be initiating, such as the escalation of the Vietnam Conflict into an all out war. That LBJ was informed by President Kennedy's Special Advisor on Natiional Security, Mr. McGeorge Bundy, while enroute to D.C. from Dallas aboard AF-1 within 60 minutes of the assassination that: "JFK was killed by a lone gunman..." is also disturbing. But, this isn't about Bundy...yet.

These items speak volumes about LBJ's role in the Crime of the Century.

Greg Burnham

Copy of original draft of NSAM 55 provided to this author courtesy Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty, USAF (Ret.)

Copy of original draft of NSAM 273 provided to this author courtesy Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty, USAF (Ret.)

Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:nsam55.jpg (JPEG/JVWR) (00006F14)

In Volume V of Inside the ARRB, Doug Horne examines the points raised in Greg's essay in great detail.

[Greg Burnham]

In Volume V of Inside the ARRB, Doug Horne examines the points raised in Greg's essay in great detail.

I haven't read that one yet, Mike. Thanks, I'll pick it up right away.