Jump to content
The Education Forum

Good article from 1998 on 1963 Coup d'Etat


Guest Robert Morrow
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest Robert Morrow

It was NOT just the military contractors and Southern conservatives who advocated a hawkish foreign policy of invading Cuba and fighting the Vietnam War. It was the Rockefellers and their CFR/CIA intelligence nexus and their "Rockefeller men" such as McGeorge Bundy, who later ran the Ford Foundation from 1966-1979 and Dean Rusk who ran the Rockefeller Foundation from 1952-1961.

Nelson Rockefeller, who some like me think was an elite sponsor of the JFK assassination, even told John Kennedy to USE TACTICAL NUKES IN NORTH VIETNAM! When Kennedy heard that his hands started shaking.

A Rockefeller foreign policy was a HAWKISH foreign policy and it was put into place starting on 11/23/63 ... really even earlier, when, stunningly, Rcokefeller man McGeorge Bundy was drafting NSAM 273 on the NIGHT BEFORE THE JFK ASSASSINATION.

Lyndon Johnson's cabinet was almost exclusive composed of Rockefeller CFR types... and I think it is critically important to note that in spring of 1968, Lyndon Johnson's #1 choice for president was none other than NELSON ROCKEFELLER!! See Robert Dallek for that.

Check out this article on the 1963 Coup d'Etat from 1998:

http://jfkawards.50megs.com/legacy.htm

John F. Kennedy Jr. said...

I think both of us have a strong sense of my father's legacy and how important it is, and we both respect it enormously.

On the 35th anniversary of John F. Kennedy's death, expect the propagandists to come out swinging, to revive the absurd conspiracy fantasy that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. An absolutely fraudulent claim which was concocted by J. Edgar Hoover and Richard Nixon to cover up the truth, the claim that Oswald shot Kennedy is still maintained through aggressive, deceptive, manipulative advocacy. But serious people who have taken the time to explore the evidence clearly understand the fact that it is simply not possible to defend such a transparent fraud. Indeed, Johnson was so obsessed by the need to cover up the truth that he appointed the Hoover-controlled Warren Commission, to blindly advocate the fraudulent claim that Oswald had acted alone -a claim which was obviously concocted even before the President was assassinated. The world was still grieving when Johnson authorized Hoover to control the so-called truth about the Kennedy assassination, but the world is now wise to that sort of time-honored fraud. Nothing terrified Lyndon Johnson more than the public outcry for a complete and thorough investigation and nobody was better suited to betray justice than the unaccountable, J. Edgar Hoover. Not surprisingly, Hoover used Lee Harvey Oswald to divert attention and to cover up the truth about the Kennedy assassination.

Lyndon Johnson claimed that the truth about Lee Harvey Oswald could never be determined -it was buried with Lee Harvey Oswald, and he is absolutely right. An aspiring "James Bond" at the height of the Cold War, history does not produce an accurate record about the adventures of young, intelligent Marines like Lee Harvey Oswald. But this is about the Kennedy assassination, and history has recorded everything about that. Specifically, the evidence that directly implicates Johnson is too consistent, too compelling and too exhaustive to deny. On the very day that John F. Kennedy was murdered, while the world was in shock, Lyndon Johnson unleashed a non-stop, pre-planned frenzy of deliberate conduct which betrayed the planning and the pre-meditation of the elaborate effort to conceal the truth. In particular, the lie that was deliberately and meticulously promoted is that John F. Kennedy did not plan to withdraw from the war in Vietnam and that the Johnson administration simply carried forth the intentions of the slain President. Indeed, despite the fact that Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson had diametrically opposed views about the Vietnam war, Johnson brilliantly created the impression that the stark contrast did not even exist. Even Kennedy's funeral did not distract Johnson -by then, he had already produced the foundation of the Warren report fraud and had instantly, meticulously and thoroughly created the impression that he did not intend to reverse the foreign policy course that Kennedy had planned to chart. The suggestion that he was not prepared well in advance for an event that only co-conspirators could predict, is simply not credible. A brilliant strategist, Lyndon Johnson was not a brilliant, spontaneous thinker, and the thought behind his deliberate actions, clearly exposes an undeniable, incriminating level of premeditation.

Richard Nixon exposed his hand in the plot to cover up the truth about the Kennedy assassination when he claimed that he called Hoover on November 22nd to ask him if one of those "right-wing nuts" had killed Kennedy. According to Nixon, Hoover replied, "No, it was a Communist." If that isn't a phony description of a phony dialogue, it's difficult to top it. Nixon further added that Oswald's wife latter disclosed that Oswald had been planning to kill Nixon when he went to Dallas. Nixon and Hoover were both in Dallas on the 21st of November, and in the process of seeking to concoct a violent image to demonize Oswald, they probably tossed all kinds of war stories around. Moreover, when Richard Nixon did not challenge Lyndon Johnson for the Presidency in 1964, he ultimately betrayed the secret collusion between political ideologues who were united over the determination to prosecute the Vietnam war and the obsession to cover up the truth about the Kennedy assassination. As late as November 22, 1963, Richard Nixon made it clear that the Kennedyswere the only ones who stood in the way of his plans when he said, "I am going to work as hard as I can to get the Kennedys out of there. We can'tafford four more years of that kind of administration." At the same time, Richard Nixon called Dean Rusk the ablest Secreatary of State that America has ever had and despite the fact that he was the most popular Republican Presidential candidate, he did not oppose Lyndon Johnson in 1964. Monday morning quarterbacks call that brilliant, a calculation that was deliberately made because Lyndon Johnson was allegedly unchallangeable in 1964. What they did not realize is that Nixon and his secret allies had engaged a bi-partisan plot to prosecute the Vietnam War and there was no room for partisan elections in an atmosphere where every move was defined by the obsession to win the Vietnam war. Indeed, as Nixon made clear, he did not challenge Johnson in the election of 1964 because his only concern was to work as hard as he could to "get the Kennedys out of there." Like Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon believed that John F. Kennedy was a foreign policy amateur whose repeated refusal to deploy combat troops to the conflict in Southeast Asia threatened the entire planet. Indeed, Nixon was so obsessed to deploy American power that he even recommended a full-scale military invasion of Cuba. In his own words: "I would find a proper legal cover and I would go in. There are several justifications that could be used, like protecting American citizens living in Cuba and defending our base in Guatanamo. I believe that the most important thing to do at this point is to get Castro and communism out of Cuba." Lee Harvey Oswald was the ideal patsy because he could be connected to Cuba and the Soviet Union through his political activism and to the Mafia through his relationship with Marcello associate, David Ferrie. Indeed, Lee Harvey Oswald was essentially the ideal patsy of every potential conspiracy, regardless of whether Oswald, Castro or the Mafia was used to deflect attention away from the truth. But in stark contrast to all the absurd, unsubstantiated, commonly promoted conspiracy theories, Lee Harvey Oswald expelled every single fraud when he simply said, "I am just a patsy". And FBI informant Jack Ruby, silenced the patsy. Beyond his relationship with Hoover's FBI, Jack Ruby was the Mafia contact who was responsible for corrupting the payoff-riddled Dallas Police. In other words, Jack Ruby was the pointman of the plot to silence the patsy -he handled the contract on Oswald's life. But every assassination plot has a hitch or two. Clinton's fatal shot was supposed to be delivered by a filibuster-free Senate. Oswald's fatal shot was supposed to be delivered by the long arm of the vigilante law while the alleged assassin was trying to evade the authorities. When Jack Ruby shot Oswald on national television, he exposed the desperate improvisatioon of an assassination plot that had skipped a beat. Lyndon Johnson certainly noticed the fact that the script had been modified and he panicked to the point where he called the hospital where Oswald lay dying and thundered the following demand: "Dr. Crenshaw, I want a deathbed confession from the accused assassin. There's a man in the operating room who will take the statement. I will expect full cooperation in thismatter." Johnson apologists claim that Dr. Crenshaw lied, but there is no reason to dispute the ethical standards of a man like Dr. Crenshaw. Sooner or latter, people have to start listening to the simple truth and start ignoring elaborate spin -but unfortunately, some people routinely prove that they either deliberately ignore or are not able to distinguish the difference.

The ultimate point is that when deception dominates, the legacy of great Americans is distorted beyond recognition. Specifically, Camelot was neither myth, nor martyr, nor legend. Against the advice of his own military Chiefs, Camelot was not arrogant in the use of great power and he refrained from satisfying their fantasy to bomb Cuba back to the stoneage. Unbeknown to the world at the time, that decision actually averted an imminent nuclear war. Cuba was prepared to launch a nuclear missile and the Soviet Union and the United States were geared to respond. Indeed, despite all the propaganda, all the deceit, all the revisionists and all the fraud artists who manufacture documents to distort the Kennedy record, Camelot was real.

[footnote]Hoover apologists dispute the claim that Nixon and Hoover were in Dallas on the 21st, but it doesn't matter -proximity is ultimately a moot point. The significant fact is that Hoover and Nixon were two peas in a single pod when it came down to plotting strategy to destroy their enemies. Nixon got a good taste of developing plots to assassinate his enemies during the Eisenhower Administration where, as a member of the National Security Counsil, he was the pointman of anti-Castro assassination plots. Hoover used the Mafia to destroy Communists at home and the covert merger of their anti-Communist resources was a typical phenomenon. During the McCarthy era, Hoover's FBI was the investigative arm that kept the witch hunts going and Richard Nixon was the beneficiary of the national attention that anti-Communist hysteria generated. It was well understood that J. Edgar Hoover had "made" Richard Nixon, and public pronouncements about their relationship are simply phony cover stories. In actual fact, Richard Nixon and Hoover were clearly aware of every single detail about who and what was behind the Kennedy assassination, the claim that some right-wing nut or some Communist was responsible, is transparently phony -and they both knew it.

We would like to pay an overdue tribute to an unheralded American hero. A former OSS and Senate Investigator, Harold Weisberg is a man who has devoted his heart, his soul, his integrity and most of his life to the task of uncovering the truth about the Kennedy and King assassinations. If he has produced authoritative records, it is certainly not surprising. To make a long story short, Weisberg proved the fallacy of blaming Oswald for the Kennedy assassination and he disproved all of the evidence that implicates James Earl Ray because it was evidently all bundled up and waiting to be discovered even before King was shot. Harold Weisberg is an honest intelligent man who develops conclusions that are so well reasoned and so meticulously researched that they are impossible to legitimately reverse. Having proved that he is an overwhelming threat to exposing the truth, Weisberg was befriended by a secretely funded fraud artist whose sole purpose, it now appears, was to keep the real truth about the Kennedy and King assassinations covered up. Indeed, without even bothering to sacrifice the time required to study the Kennedy assassination, media darling Gerald Posner wrote what is essentially a corrupt "prosecutor's brief" to implicate Lee Harvey Oswald in the crime of the century. If it was an honest brief, the effort would be commendable, but Weisberg exposed Posner's work for what it is when he said: "The dishonesty is unending and, without this permeating dishonesty he has no book. Misrepresenting established fact is his forte and omitting what he knows and is true is one of the means by which he undertook to rewrite the truth about the assassination, whatever his motive or motives may be." Harold Weisberg knows what he is talking about and it takes a much bigger man than a fraud artist like Gerald Posner to destroy the legacy of an American hero.

Posner's attempt to savage the integrity of an honest giant like Harold Weisberg is contemptible. The fact that the media embraces Posner and grants him the opportunity to promote a "legal brief" that in Weisberg's unfailing words, "deceives and misleads the people" is deeply troubling. In his typically understated manner, Weisberg laments the deceptive state of affairs and muses about the manipulation of and by the media when he says: "What does all this say about the state of the 'fourth estate' of the nation, and of its future?" The media obviously has a long way to go to regain its credibility, and it can perhaps begin by acknowledging genuine American heroes like Harold Weisberg.

It is because independent, reasonable, meticulous researchers like Harold Weisberg advance the quest for the truth that we are now in a position to unravel some of the lies behind the Kennedy assassination. First and foremost, the assassination of John F. Kennedy was evidently motivated by the fact that the President refused to deploy combat troops in Southeast Asia and that he planned to pull out of the Vietnam war by 1965, win, lose or draw. It is not our position to claim that Lyndon Johnson was a murderer and we in fact doubt it. What we do know is that Lyndon Johnson passionately shared the belief that the failure to draw the line in Vietnam would have triggered World War III and Kennedy was essentially the first casualty of the determination to deploy combat troops. Having equated the need to win the Vietnam war and theprospect of saving the world from a nuclear holocaust, Johnson's choices were firmly and clearly pre-defined. It was a tragic circumstance that Lyndon Johnson agonized over and accepted because in his mind, every single Vietnam war casualty was a necessary sacrifice. He did not share Kennedy's historic perspective regarding the futile war that French combat troops had abandoned, and that made all the difference.

Dean Rusk betrayed the Kennedy assassination cover up when he repeatedly claimed that Kennedy had always planned to deploy combat troops to the war effort in Vietnam. In his own words, Rusk said: "There was never any question in Kennedy's mind that Southeast Asia was vital to the security of the United States. The only question in his mind was where we would make the fight if we had to make a fight, and his decision was we should make it in Vietnam." The bold, unadulterated lie that Kennedy had planned to deploy American combat troops in Vietnam was repeated over and over and over again by both Dean Rusk and McGeorge Bundy, and now we know why it took Robert McNamara over three decades to finally tell the truth about those lies.

No, no, no, we are not conspiracy kooks who claim that Chief Justice Earl Warren also engaged the plot to murder the President. Warren simply rubber stamped the "evidence" that FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover compiled to fraudulently implicate Oswald -a controversial conspiracy is never shared by the entire government.

The truth, as we now know, can be very elusive and shocking and we are not claiming infallibility -like everybody, we are certainly prone to be misled. All you have to do is read our newsletter to determine the fact that we had dismissed the legitimacy of reports about a semen-stained dress and they proved to be true. At the same time, how could we have possibly determined the fact that the Lewinsky dress was the insurance policy of the plot to destroy the President? What Clinton did was clearly wrong but it does not rise to the level of a fraudulent insurance policy claim. Time has a way of sorting out the truth and having lived through one political assassination, we refuse to support another. But most importantof all, it is absolutely vital to acknowledge the sacrifice and the contribution of genuine American heroes like Harold Weisberg. [postedSeptember 18, 1998

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Robert Morrow

It was NOT just the military contractors and Southern conservatives who advocated a hawkish foreign policy of invading Cuba and fighting the Vietnam War. It was the Rockefellers and their CFR/CIA intelligence nexus and their "Rockefeller men" such as McGeorge Bundy, who later ran the Ford Foundation from 1966-1979 and Dean Rusk who ran the Rockefeller Foundation from 1952-1961.

Nelson Rockefeller, who some like me think was an elite sponsor of the JFK assassination, even told John Kennedy to USE TACTICAL NUKES IN NORTH VIETNAM! When Kennedy heard that his hands started shaking.

A Rockefeller foreign policy was a HAWKISH foreign policy and it was put into place starting on 11/23/63 ... really even earlier, when, stunningly, Rcokefeller man McGeorge Bundy was drafting NSAM 273 on the NIGHT BEFORE THE JFK ASSASSINATION.

Lyndon Johnson's cabinet was almost exclusive composed of Rockefeller CFR types... and I think it is critically important to note that in spring of 1968, Lyndon Johnson's #1 choice for president was none other than NELSON ROCKEFELLER!! See Robert Dallek for that.

Check out this article on the 1963 Coup d'Etat from 1998:

http://jfkawards.50megs.com/legacy.htm

John F. Kennedy Jr. said...

I think both of us have a strong sense of my father's legacy and how important it is, and we both respect it enormously.

On the 35th anniversary of John F. Kennedy's death, expect the propagandists to come out swinging, to revive the absurd conspiracy fantasy that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. An absolutely fraudulent claim which was concocted by J. Edgar Hoover and Richard Nixon to cover up the truth, the claim that Oswald shot Kennedy is still maintained through aggressive, deceptive, manipulative advocacy. But serious people who have taken the time to explore the evidence clearly understand the fact that it is simply not possible to defend such a transparent fraud. Indeed, Johnson was so obsessed by the need to cover up the truth that he appointed the Hoover-controlled Warren Commission, to blindly advocate the fraudulent claim that Oswald had acted alone -a claim which was obviously concocted even before the President was assassinated. The world was still grieving when Johnson authorized Hoover to control the so-called truth about the Kennedy assassination, but the world is now wise to that sort of time-honored fraud. Nothing terrified Lyndon Johnson more than the public outcry for a complete and thorough investigation and nobody was better suited to betray justice than the unaccountable, J. Edgar Hoover. Not surprisingly, Hoover used Lee Harvey Oswald to divert attention and to cover up the truth about the Kennedy assassination.

Lyndon Johnson claimed that the truth about Lee Harvey Oswald could never be determined -it was buried with Lee Harvey Oswald, and he is absolutely right. An aspiring "James Bond" at the height of the Cold War, history does not produce an accurate record about the adventures of young, intelligent Marines like Lee Harvey Oswald. But this is about the Kennedy assassination, and history has recorded everything about that. Specifically, the evidence that directly implicates Johnson is too consistent, too compelling and too exhaustive to deny. On the very day that John F. Kennedy was murdered, while the world was in shock, Lyndon Johnson unleashed a non-stop, pre-planned frenzy of deliberate conduct which betrayed the planning and the pre-meditation of the elaborate effort to conceal the truth. In particular, the lie that was deliberately and meticulously promoted is that John F. Kennedy did not plan to withdraw from the war in Vietnam and that the Johnson administration simply carried forth the intentions of the slain President. Indeed, despite the fact that Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson had diametrically opposed views about the Vietnam war, Johnson brilliantly created the impression that the stark contrast did not even exist. Even Kennedy's funeral did not distract Johnson -by then, he had already produced the foundation of the Warren report fraud and had instantly, meticulously and thoroughly created the impression that he did not intend to reverse the foreign policy course that Kennedy had planned to chart. The suggestion that he was not prepared well in advance for an event that only co-conspirators could predict, is simply not credible. A brilliant strategist, Lyndon Johnson was not a brilliant, spontaneous thinker, and the thought behind his deliberate actions, clearly exposes an undeniable, incriminating level of premeditation.

Richard Nixon exposed his hand in the plot to cover up the truth about the Kennedy assassination when he claimed that he called Hoover on November 22nd to ask him if one of those "right-wing nuts" had killed Kennedy. According to Nixon, Hoover replied, "No, it was a Communist." If that isn't a phony description of a phony dialogue, it's difficult to top it. Nixon further added that Oswald's wife latter disclosed that Oswald had been planning to kill Nixon when he went to Dallas. Nixon and Hoover were both in Dallas on the 21st of November, and in the process of seeking to concoct a violent image to demonize Oswald, they probably tossed all kinds of war stories around. Moreover, when Richard Nixon did not challenge Lyndon Johnson for the Presidency in 1964, he ultimately betrayed the secret collusion between political ideologues who were united over the determination to prosecute the Vietnam war and the obsession to cover up the truth about the Kennedy assassination. As late as November 22, 1963, Richard Nixon made it clear that the Kennedyswere the only ones who stood in the way of his plans when he said, "I am going to work as hard as I can to get the Kennedys out of there. We can'tafford four more years of that kind of administration." At the same time, Richard Nixon called Dean Rusk the ablest Secreatary of State that America has ever had and despite the fact that he was the most popular Republican Presidential candidate, he did not oppose Lyndon Johnson in 1964. Monday morning quarterbacks call that brilliant, a calculation that was deliberately made because Lyndon Johnson was allegedly unchallangeable in 1964. What they did not realize is that Nixon and his secret allies had engaged a bi-partisan plot to prosecute the Vietnam War and there was no room for partisan elections in an atmosphere where every move was defined by the obsession to win the Vietnam war. Indeed, as Nixon made clear, he did not challenge Johnson in the election of 1964 because his only concern was to work as hard as he could to "get the Kennedys out of there." Like Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon believed that John F. Kennedy was a foreign policy amateur whose repeated refusal to deploy combat troops to the conflict in Southeast Asia threatened the entire planet. Indeed, Nixon was so obsessed to deploy American power that he even recommended a full-scale military invasion of Cuba. In his own words: "I would find a proper legal cover and I would go in. There are several justifications that could be used, like protecting American citizens living in Cuba and defending our base in Guatanamo. I believe that the most important thing to do at this point is to get Castro and communism out of Cuba." Lee Harvey Oswald was the ideal patsy because he could be connected to Cuba and the Soviet Union through his political activism and to the Mafia through his relationship with Marcello associate, David Ferrie. Indeed, Lee Harvey Oswald was essentially the ideal patsy of every potential conspiracy, regardless of whether Oswald, Castro or the Mafia was used to deflect attention away from the truth. But in stark contrast to all the absurd, unsubstantiated, commonly promoted conspiracy theories, Lee Harvey Oswald expelled every single fraud when he simply said, "I am just a patsy". And FBI informant Jack Ruby, silenced the patsy. Beyond his relationship with Hoover's FBI, Jack Ruby was the Mafia contact who was responsible for corrupting the payoff-riddled Dallas Police. In other words, Jack Ruby was the pointman of the plot to silence the patsy -he handled the contract on Oswald's life. But every assassination plot has a hitch or two. Clinton's fatal shot was supposed to be delivered by a filibuster-free Senate. Oswald's fatal shot was supposed to be delivered by the long arm of the vigilante law while the alleged assassin was trying to evade the authorities. When Jack Ruby shot Oswald on national television, he exposed the desperate improvisatioon of an assassination plot that had skipped a beat. Lyndon Johnson certainly noticed the fact that the script had been modified and he panicked to the point where he called the hospital where Oswald lay dying and thundered the following demand: "Dr. Crenshaw, I want a deathbed confession from the accused assassin. There's a man in the operating room who will take the statement. I will expect full cooperation in thismatter." Johnson apologists claim that Dr. Crenshaw lied, but there is no reason to dispute the ethical standards of a man like Dr. Crenshaw. Sooner or latter, people have to start listening to the simple truth and start ignoring elaborate spin -but unfortunately, some people routinely prove that they either deliberately ignore or are not able to distinguish the difference.

The ultimate point is that when deception dominates, the legacy of great Americans is distorted beyond recognition. Specifically, Camelot was neither myth, nor martyr, nor legend. Against the advice of his own military Chiefs, Camelot was not arrogant in the use of great power and he refrained from satisfying their fantasy to bomb Cuba back to the stoneage. Unbeknown to the world at the time, that decision actually averted an imminent nuclear war. Cuba was prepared to launch a nuclear missile and the Soviet Union and the United States were geared to respond. Indeed, despite all the propaganda, all the deceit, all the revisionists and all the fraud artists who manufacture documents to distort the Kennedy record, Camelot was real.

[footnote]Hoover apologists dispute the claim that Nixon and Hoover were in Dallas on the 21st, but it doesn't matter -proximity is ultimately a moot point. The significant fact is that Hoover and Nixon were two peas in a single pod when it came down to plotting strategy to destroy their enemies. Nixon got a good taste of developing plots to assassinate his enemies during the Eisenhower Administration where, as a member of the National Security Counsil, he was the pointman of anti-Castro assassination plots. Hoover used the Mafia to destroy Communists at home and the covert merger of their anti-Communist resources was a typical phenomenon. During the McCarthy era, Hoover's FBI was the investigative arm that kept the witch hunts going and Richard Nixon was the beneficiary of the national attention that anti-Communist hysteria generated. It was well understood that J. Edgar Hoover had "made" Richard Nixon, and public pronouncements about their relationship are simply phony cover stories. In actual fact, Richard Nixon and Hoover were clearly aware of every single detail about who and what was behind the Kennedy assassination, the claim that some right-wing nut or some Communist was responsible, is transparently phony -and they both knew it.

We would like to pay an overdue tribute to an unheralded American hero. A former OSS and Senate Investigator, Harold Weisberg is a man who has devoted his heart, his soul, his integrity and most of his life to the task of uncovering the truth about the Kennedy and King assassinations. If he has produced authoritative records, it is certainly not surprising. To make a long story short, Weisberg proved the fallacy of blaming Oswald for the Kennedy assassination and he disproved all of the evidence that implicates James Earl Ray because it was evidently all bundled up and waiting to be discovered even before King was shot. Harold Weisberg is an honest intelligent man who develops conclusions that are so well reasoned and so meticulously researched that they are impossible to legitimately reverse. Having proved that he is an overwhelming threat to exposing the truth, Weisberg was befriended by a secretely funded fraud artist whose sole purpose, it now appears, was to keep the real truth about the Kennedy and King assassinations covered up. Indeed, without even bothering to sacrifice the time required to study the Kennedy assassination, media darling Gerald Posner wrote what is essentially a corrupt "prosecutor's brief" to implicate Lee Harvey Oswald in the crime of the century. If it was an honest brief, the effort would be commendable, but Weisberg exposed Posner's work for what it is when he said: "The dishonesty is unending and, without this permeating dishonesty he has no book. Misrepresenting established fact is his forte and omitting what he knows and is true is one of the means by which he undertook to rewrite the truth about the assassination, whatever his motive or motives may be." Harold Weisberg knows what he is talking about and it takes a much bigger man than a fraud artist like Gerald Posner to destroy the legacy of an American hero.

Posner's attempt to savage the integrity of an honest giant like Harold Weisberg is contemptible. The fact that the media embraces Posner and grants him the opportunity to promote a "legal brief" that in Weisberg's unfailing words, "deceives and misleads the people" is deeply troubling. In his typically understated manner, Weisberg laments the deceptive state of affairs and muses about the manipulation of and by the media when he says: "What does all this say about the state of the 'fourth estate' of the nation, and of its future?" The media obviously has a long way to go to regain its credibility, and it can perhaps begin by acknowledging genuine American heroes like Harold Weisberg.

It is because independent, reasonable, meticulous researchers like Harold Weisberg advance the quest for the truth that we are now in a position to unravel some of the lies behind the Kennedy assassination. First and foremost, the assassination of John F. Kennedy was evidently motivated by the fact that the President refused to deploy combat troops in Southeast Asia and that he planned to pull out of the Vietnam war by 1965, win, lose or draw. It is not our position to claim that Lyndon Johnson was a murderer and we in fact doubt it. What we do know is that Lyndon Johnson passionately shared the belief that the failure to draw the line in Vietnam would have triggered World War III and Kennedy was essentially the first casualty of the determination to deploy combat troops. Having equated the need to win the Vietnam war and theprospect of saving the world from a nuclear holocaust, Johnson's choices were firmly and clearly pre-defined. It was a tragic circumstance that Lyndon Johnson agonized over and accepted because in his mind, every single Vietnam war casualty was a necessary sacrifice. He did not share Kennedy's historic perspective regarding the futile war that French combat troops had abandoned, and that made all the difference.

Dean Rusk betrayed the Kennedy assassination cover up when he repeatedly claimed that Kennedy had always planned to deploy combat troops to the war effort in Vietnam. In his own words, Rusk said: "There was never any question in Kennedy's mind that Southeast Asia was vital to the security of the United States. The only question in his mind was where we would make the fight if we had to make a fight, and his decision was we should make it in Vietnam." The bold, unadulterated lie that Kennedy had planned to deploy American combat troops in Vietnam was repeated over and over and over again by both Dean Rusk and McGeorge Bundy, and now we know why it took Robert McNamara over three decades to finally tell the truth about those lies.

No, no, no, we are not conspiracy kooks who claim that Chief Justice Earl Warren also engaged the plot to murder the President. Warren simply rubber stamped the "evidence" that FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover compiled to fraudulently implicate Oswald -a controversial conspiracy is never shared by the entire government.

The truth, as we now know, can be very elusive and shocking and we are not claiming infallibility -like everybody, we are certainly prone to be misled. All you have to do is read our newsletter to determine the fact that we had dismissed the legitimacy of reports about a semen-stained dress and they proved to be true. At the same time, how could we have possibly determined the fact that the Lewinsky dress was the insurance policy of the plot to destroy the President? What Clinton did was clearly wrong but it does not rise to the level of a fraudulent insurance policy claim. Time has a way of sorting out the truth and having lived through one political assassination, we refuse to support another. But most importantof all, it is absolutely vital to acknowledge the sacrifice and the contribution of genuine American heroes like Harold Weisberg. [postedSeptember 18, 1998

More on McGeorge Bundy:

Gerald Ven asks "Is McGeorge Bundy the traitorous link between the Diem & JFK assassinations?"

Is McGeorge Bundy the traitorous link between the Diem & JFK assassinations ?

Stanley Karnow, Vietnam. Viking, 1983 pg 305, informs that :

" Before the (Diem) coup officially began, (Lucien) Conein was summoned to Big Minh’s general

staff headquarters and given a direct line of communication to the Saigon CIA outpost. "

Moreover,

" To support this point, more recently, it’s been revealed that during the coup,

Conein was also in steady cable contact with McGeorge Bundy at the White House Situation Room. "

- Kai Bird, “Cries and Whispers.”, Wahingtonian (October, 1998):48

Vincent J. Salandria :

What was McGeorge Bundy doing on the day President Kennedy was dispatched? Theodore H. White, in his book, The Making of the President, 1964, tells us that the Presidential party on its flight back to Washington on the afternoon of that fateful day "learned that there was no conspiracy, learned of the identity of Oswald and his arrest ..." This was the very first announcement of Oswald as the lone assassin. . . . Can there be any doubt that for any government taken by surprise by the assassination --- and legitimately seeking the truth concerning it --- less than six hours after the time of the assassination was too soon to know there was no conspiracy? This announcement was the first which designated Oswald as the lone assassin. Who was responsible for that announcement?

That announcement came from the White House Situation Room. Under whose direct control was the White House Situation Room? The Situation Room was under the personal and direct control of McGeorge Bundy.

. . .

Make no mistake about it. Bundy, who had been in the Pentagon when the announcement of the assassination was issued, spent that fateful afternoon in the Situation Room. Jim Bishop tells how President Johnson was --- while on Air Force One flying back to Washington --- "...phoning McGeorge Bundy in the White House Situation Room every few minutes."

The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy:A Model of Explanation

by Vincent J. Salandria

http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_issues/16th_Issue/vs1.html

“ Did Conein and Bundy team up on November 22nd when Conein was on Houston Street and Bundy at the White House Situation Room?

We know however, they were there.

What did Bundy do at the White House situation room?

Was he organizing Operation Big Lift or was he running the ambush from the Situation Room? “

Alen Salerian, MD, has this to say :

"If, despite the evidence, one might possibly be dubious of McNamara's role, there can be little doubt of Bundy's involvement. . . .

He single-handedly managed to create an epochal cable on August 24, 1963, authorizing a coup against the leader of South Vietnam, President Ngo Dinh Diem. At first, the dispatch of the cable appeared to be a mere accident. Bundy pointed the finger at his young assistants Michael Forrestal and Roger Hilsman. Kennedy was furious, of course. 'This #### must stop!' he shouted at Forrestal. The young Bundy assistant took the brunt of Kennedy's fury and offered his resignation. Once again, Kennedy declined.

But the question is: how could Bundy, the nation's top gun on national security, be unaware of such a pivotal message? How could a young national security aide, without the knowledge or approval of his boss, send a historical paradigm-shifting cable to authorize a covert coup d'état in Vietnam? Bundy's response? It's a bad idea, he said, to make major policy decisions on weekends.

"The error of August 24 could not be fully appreciated if it had not been preceded by a similar occurrence during the Bay of Pigs. Bundy's absence was eerily similar to the disappearance of Allen Dulles, the head of the CIA, during the crucial days of the Bay of Pigs. Bundy's tricks with the October 29th meeting are well recorded with his admission that, in fact, he had given Henry Cabot Lodge, the ambassador to Vietnam, a green light for a coup d'état despite presidential orders against such an act.

"The coup did occur, not only toppling the government but also taking the lives of President Diem and his younger brother and adviser, Ngo Dinh Nhu. This was yet another blow to President Kennedy's personal instructions. He had sent his personal friend as his emissary to Vietnam to negotiate Diem's peaceful exit out of Vietnam. Understandably, when the news arrived at the White House, a sickened and ashen president in visible distress quickly left the conference room.

The conclusion seem inescapable that he had realized someone had been betrayed him, although he did not know who, why, or how. It might have been his gut feeling telling him that something horrendous was going on, yet he could not let himself think his most important aide and his chief military adviser was the mole.

"A modern Brutus betraying democracy. Bundy's jokes were telling. When the Diem brothers' murders surfaced with their hands tied behind their backs and bullets lodged in their necks, he commented, 'This is not the preferred way to commit suicide.' Bundy was at the White House Situation Room chatting with Lucien Conein, the CIA station chief in Saigon who was at the command center of the coup d'état with bags full of dollars for the triumphant generals.

Did Conein and Bundy team up on November 22nd when Conein was on Houston Street and Bundy at the White House Situation Room? We know however, they were there. What did Bundy do at the White House situation room? Was he organizing Operation Big Lift or was he running the ambush from the Situation Room?

"And why was Conein's smile published all over the world with the presidential limousine slowly approaching the death zone on Elm Street ?

"Was this a Dulles or Bundy genius to boldly inform the world who makes the big decisions in Texas by not concealing the face of the CIA station chief, recently returned from facilitating a coup in Vietnam only three weeks earlier?

"Perhaps it is nothing more sublime yet devastating than deception by a trusted man that makes us understand JFK's failure to suspect the virulence of Bundy, a brilliant virtuoso of deceit. Some historians and behavior experts may wrongly blame Kennedy for letting his guard down to trust a compulsive xxxx like Bundy. Or worse for not firing Bundy after the Bay of Pigs.

"And here comes the creative genius of Allen Dulles, the most likely architect of the big strategy. During the Bay of Pigs, Dulles made himself the conspicuous target for the blunder, the obvious villain by disappearing for several days to lure the Kennedy brothers to an elegant trap.

"What is remarkable is that Dulles's success rested on its blunt openness of his obvious responsibility for the military fiasco. He virtually produced the evidence making him the fall guy to steer any careful scrutiny away from Bundy and Bundy's defining error correctly diagnosed by General Maxwell Taylor—that is, the error or calling off the all-important air strikes, thereby ensuring a rout by Cuban forces.

"The President took the bait, so did his brother Bobby. If Dulles had designed a simple plan for future spies, his strategy should be recorded as a classic in the annals of grand deceptions. Whereas democracy, human life, and progress depend on trust and transparency, Dulles and his organization had a different premise.

. . .

"Once Bundy's deception emerges and his emotional, historical, political roots to Dulles and their frenzied, coordinated demolition of the Kennedy White House are discovered, the giant sketch of the coup d'état is visible and not so mysterious or hypothetical. You do not have to be a student of the complexity theory to marvel at the painstaking labor and extensive design that put so many diverse and dissonant pieces together that paved the road to Dealey Plaza.

http://leftlooking.blogspot.com/2009/11/op-ed-news-article-names-traitors-in.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...