Jump to content
The Education Forum

Syllabus for JFK Criminal Investigative Research

Recommended Posts

There needs to be encourgament to have read/watched these and have it formally encourged with links, and recognize a Gold Standard to the Upper Knowledge of the JFK Hit. So. my recommended Course Syllabus for "JFK Criminal Investigative Research" is the following information sources that can be completed in about 10 weeks for the serious minded person seeking the truth on JFK's demise:

1. The Garrison Findings.

2. The JVB / LHO Story.

3. The EH / Mary Sherman Story.

4. The Milteer Story and those FBI files

5. The Astrucia Story and how Drugs figure in.

6. The LaRouche Story on Drugs Inc.

7. The Piper Story of Bloomfield.

8. The mismatch of Connally's Story.

9. The Zapruder Film in High Res. DVD

10. All the other Films/Photos that support Zapruder

11. The Lucien Sarti connections to Drugs and Montreal

12. All the Bob Harris YouTube Videos, as they point in generally the right directions

13. See all 9 of the Nigel Turner TMWKK series, especially the 7, 8, 9 episodes

14. The realization that the WC report is a Hoax, by LBJ and JEH, as treason against America

That will provide a solid knowledge base to begin. No one should attempt to wade into the JFK area until they have checked out all of the above. You will find Morty Bloomfield and DISC, then George Mandel and the Jesuits, then Talmudic Rabbi Tiber Rosenbaum and the Mafia / Mossad bank. Then tie in the following:


This fella gets an A in connecting the dots to CIA and Mossad---ferreting out Tibor Rosenbaum---finding the IG Farben industrial security system connected with Bernhard. Roots of DISC=NW7 and CIA. These are the Mossad good ole boys, godfathers, run by the Mossad's banker Tibor Rosenbaum.




The original title De Moordvrienden doesn’t make much sense translated into English. The literal translation would be something like The Murder Friends. In The Netherlands people are using the expression ‘Moordvrienden’ to describe the relationship between two real good friends. An alternative English title could be something like: Birds of a deadly feather, but this matter still remains to be seen.

De Moordvrienden opens with the development, during and after WWII, of a right wing network, using anticommunism as an argument for involvement in all kind of politcal subversion and criminal affairs. Considering this it’s not so strange that organised crime joined the anticommunist network already during the war. The structure of the anticommunist network is illustrated in De Moordvrienden by the friendly relationship between his Royal Highness Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, the husband of the former Dutch Queen Her Royal Highness Princess Juliana and the Hungarian born banker/Mossad agent Tibor Rosenbaum. The intention of De Moordvrienden is to consider the friendship between these two men and their role in the anticommunist network, in relation to one of the most important events in modern history: the assassination of the American president John F.Kennedy. A short summary of De Moordvrienden follows below.

In the early thirties, the SA and SS member Prince Bernhard, began to work for NW 7, the industrial espionage department of IG Farben. This chemical manufacturing company earned an infamous reputation in history because it financed the nazi party’s rise to power. Bernhard’s employer was looking for a way to gain influence on the highest level in the Netherlands. At that point the management of IG Farben knew the Dutch royal family was looking for someone to mary crownprincess Juliana. Bernhard appeared as the ideal candidate for this marriage and was pushed forward as such by IG Farben. The Dutch government considered itself very lucky to find such an ideal person to marry the crownprincess. Bernhard had an ideal background and was not bad looking either. At the same time the Dutch government never realised that they invited a ‘trojan horse’, because at that point Bernhard was nothing else than an IG Farben mole. Officially Bernhard terminated his duties for IG Farben when he married to Juana, but there is wide evidence that the prince stayed loyal to his former employer and to the companies the German chemical manufacturer was associated with, like the American Standard Oil from the Rockefeller family. His loyalty towards IG Farben remained when the occupation of the Netherlands by nazi Germany began.

During most of the war Bernhard stayed in London, where he got associated with a cooperation between British, Dutch and German intelligence organisations, known as the ‘Englandspiel’. The intention of this covert operation was to round up communist and other leftish resistance groups in the Netherlands in a collective effort between these agencies. The Englandspiel clearly shows that circles in London were more afraid of communism, than of national socialism. On the background of the Englandspiel were the interests of both German and American multinationals, especially those of IG Farben and Standard Oil. National Socialism was seen there as the most effective protection against Soviet communism. Under these conditions there was readiness in both the UK and the USA to come to terms with the nazi’s. Bernhard played a key role in the negociations to come to a reconsilation between the nazi’s and the Anglosaxon estabishment. In his perception the pre-war conditions in the Netherlands and the st of Europe, would not return in case a deal with the Germans would be reached. The prince hated democracy and wanted to rule by himself; in other words he wanted the full power. To reach this, Bernhard was prepared to join any possible alliance. He even wrote a letter to the nazi’s in which he proposed to rule over the Netherlands on their behalf. But in the same period Bernhard also got introduced to representatives of the American intelligence community and the military industrial complex, two grop overlapping each other in all kind of ways. The contacts with both the former nazi network and the Anglosaxon estabishment would be very important in the later life of the prince.

After the war the alliance aganinst communism took care of it that the image of national socialism, as being the main threat to humanity, was immediately replaced by the threat of Soviet communism. Consequently the Cold War was born. Under these conditions the persecution of war criminals had no high priority. Many of the former nazi’s got their old jobs back as a result of this. The cooperation, that had started during the war between Anglsaxon establishment and the structures that were left behind by the nazi’s, continued in the post-war period. For instance: the Americans took over the ‘Abwehr’ spy network that was build up during the war by the nazi Reinhard Gehlen. And under ‘Operation Paperclip’ many nazi were offered the possibilty to escape to the American continent.

Bernhard did everything to widen his influence in the post war period. He was asked by a fromer IG Farben superiorto become a representative for the Lockheed company, from which he took lots of bribes. In 1954 he became the president of the Bilderberg meetings, in which the cooperation between the anglosaxon and former nazi network was strongly represented. This way the Bilderbergers became one of the main strongholds against communism in Europe and the USA. In 1976 evidence appeared that Bernhard had taken bribes from Lockheed. Under pressure caused by this development he had to give up many of his public functions. He was also forced to resign as president of the Bilderbergmeetings. But the prince kept being associated with the highest circles, since he had created an alternative for Bilderberg. In the beginning of the seventies he had founded the 1001 club, a society of financers of the World Wildlife fund. The international elite was widely represented here, just like it was in the Bilderbergers. It was ithe 1001 club where the other key figure in De Moordvrienden, Tibor Rosenbaum, appeared for the first time in relation to Prince Bernhard.

Tibor Rosenbaum was born in Hungary. His parents were religious jews who made their son become a Rabbi. During the war Rosenbaum was strongly associated with zionist organisations, like the ‘Relief and Rescue committee’ from dr. Rudolf Kastner. At the last stage of the war Kastner made deals with the nazi Adolf Eichmann, who made it possible that a small number of prominent zionist jews from Hungary could travel to Palestine. In exchange for this Kastner assisted the nazi’s with the deporatation of the majority of Hungarian jews to the death camps. After the war Rosenbaum remained being influenced by zionism. He travelled to Israel where he came to live in a kibbutz. But he couldn’t get used there to the collective atmosphere there which made him leave Israel shortly after. Subcequently Rosenbaum came to Switserland, where he kept defending zionist interests. He became president of the Jewish Agency and the ‘World Zionist Organisation’. In this period Rosenbaum became very importt for Israel, because he worked for the ‘Israel Corporation’, a fundraising institution that financed the advancement of Israel. This position made him very popular in the jewish state. In the late fifties Rosenbaum founded the ‘Banque du Crédit International’ (BCI). In reality this meant that he became a Mossad agent, because it was through this bank that operations of the Mossad were financed.

In the mean time Tibor Rosenbaum had started a friendly relationship with Prince Bernhard. This friendship can’t be considered separat from zionism becoming a partner in the anticommunist network shortly after the creation of Israel. Although it was national socialims that had killed more than five million jews during the war, it was Soviet communism being seen by the zionists as the main threat from now on. A cooperation between zionists and the existing anti communist network followed as result. While Bernhard could be seen as an important reprentative of the Aglosaxon/nazi component in this structure, Rosenbaum appeared as such in relation to zionism.

Rosenbaum lost his popularity in Israel when his involvement was discovered in illegal speculation with funds from the Israel Corporation. This event would eventually mean the end of Rosenbaum’s BCI. Prince Bernhard tried to protect his friend Rosenbaum from going bankrupt. In an attempt to solve the financial problem of the BCI he sold the castle ‘Warmelo’ to another company from his Hungarian born friend. He did this for an outrageous low price. But the sale of the castle had very little result, since the BCI was going bankrupt anyway. Subcequently Bernhard saw his castle disappear in the BCI bankruptcy. This caused an enormous problem for Bernhard, since the castle was not completely his. Anyway, the prince needed money suddenly at that point. And he needed it fast, which made him beg for money at the companies that bribed him before. The notes he send to the Lockheed company with requests for more money, later formed the essential evidence that the prince had been ‘on the take’.

Before Rosenbaum was unmasked as a fraud, he had gained some popularity with his BCI. Many account holders had ties with the jewish state, which was not so strange since rosenbaum’s bank could be seen as Mossad bank. At the same time the BCI was actively involved in laudering money from the criminal empire of Meyer Lansky. Like Rosenbaum, Lansky was a fierce supporter of the state of Israel. In return for his financial contributions he received protection form the Mossad. The revenues of Lansky’s criminal practices were partly laundered through Bernie Cornfields ‘Investors Overseas Services’ (IOS), in those days a very poular investment company. Rosenbaum appeared as the financial wizard in the background of IOS. Later an enormous financial scandal was caused when IOS was taken over violently by the American criminal Robert Vesco. Like Rosenbaum Vesco was acquainted to Prince Bernhard.

The BCI form Prince Bernhard’s friend Tibor Rosenbaum is mentioned frequently as financer of the Italian/Canadian/American Permindex company. It is at this point where De Moordvrienden takes a step in the direction of the Kennedy assassination. Permindex appears as the link between the anticommunist network, in which Prince Bernhard has manifested himself so prominently, and the theories concerning the fatal shots that were fired on Kennedy on 22 november 1963.

In 1967 Permindex board member Clay Shaw was arrested for involvement in a conspiracy against Kennedy, by New Orleans district attorney Jim Garrison. Prior to the Kennedy assassination Shaw was seen together with Lee Harvey Oswald. Killing the American president was the topic of a conversation where both Shaw and Oswald were present. For Garrison this was enough reason to put Shaw under investigation. He discovered that Shaw had been performing assignments for the CIA. In 1967, however, Jim Garrison couldn’t proove that Shaw was working for the ‘Agency’. This is why Shaw was declared innocent by court eventually, as can be seen in Oliver Stone’s movie JFK. But although Shaw couldn’t be proved guilty, Garrison was able to gather a lot of information on the structure of Permindex and the anticommunist network this company was connected to. Permindex appears in Garrison’s research, as an organisation specialised in political assassinations. Some researchers have paid attention to Peindex in the mean time. Each time this company has been specifically placed in the perspective of the research these people were working on. This way Permindex has been called a front for the CIA, an organisation of former nazi’s, or a ‘Murder inc’ financed by organised crime and the Mossad. These conclusions are all more or less tru, but still the essence of Permindex has never been reached this way. De Moordvrienden approaches this matter differently. For the first time Permindex comes forad as a collective initiative, by the groups represented in the anticommunist network that wanted Kennedy out of the way.

Permindex was founded in the fifties by the Hungarian Ferenc Nagy, who served earlier as a minister in the pro-nazi government of Horty in Hungary during WWII. The communist takeover in his home country turned Nagy into a fierce supporter of anticommunism. Other board members of Permindex had strong affiliations with segments of the anticommunist network as well. Take for instance Major Bloomfield, who was president of the Permindex branche in Montreal. Bloomfield had previously worked for the secret British sabotage organisation ‘Standard Operations Executive’(SOE). During the war SOE cooperated with the predecessor of the CIA, the OSS. Shortly after the war the SOE structures assisted in the development of Israeli intelligence. Like Rosenbaum, Bloomfield was a member of Prince Bernhards 1001 club and had warm feelings towards Israel. Together with Clay Shaw, Bloomfield represented the Anglosaxon intelligence agencies within Permindex, like the CIA. There was reason enough for the CIA to be upset bKennedy, after the ‘bay of pigs’ fiasco. This invasion of Cuba, that was organised by the CIA, was a complete faillure. The CIA and anti-Castro Cubans had to beg Kennedy for military assistance, but he didn’t gave in to that request, because he feared escalation of the conflict with the Soviet Union. As a result of the ‘Bay of Pigs’ fiasco, Allen Dulles and his CIA felt betrayed by Kennedy. Prince Bernhard was very close with CIA icons like Dulles. They were among the circles he go ntroduced to during the war. In 1954 Allen Dulles was one of the founding members of the Bilderbergmeetings.

But it was not only the CIA that couldn’t stand Kennedy, since he also declared war on organised crime. This was reason enough for the ‘National Crime Syndicat’ to have a contract on him. The absolute leader of the National Crime Syndicat was Meyer Lansky, who was mentioned before because of his relation with Tibor Rosenbaum and the Mossad. Through Rosenbaum, Lansky comes forward as one of the dark forces behind Permindex. Lansky hated Kennedy, to start with because of the antisemitism of the American President’s father Joseph. From John F. Kennedy Lansky expected nothing else than hate of jews. Lansky was wrong, because Kennedy didn’t share his fathers antisemitism. But Lansky couldn’t explain Kennedy’s war on crime any other way. Besides there was also another reason why Lansky hated Kennedy, whichs also had to do with Israel. During the elections after which Kennedy became president he was strongly supported by the pro Israel lobby in Israel. They gave him money and advic their followers to vote for him. In exchange the pro Israel lobby expected influence in the US policy towards the middle east. After becoming president Kennedy disappointed the pro Israel lobby. Kennedy decided to widen American influence in this region. This meant that not only Israel, but also other countries in the Middle East, would be supported by the USA. And than there was the matter of the nuclear policy of Israel. After becoming president, Kenenedy was informed by his predecessor Eisenhower, thatIrael was working on a nuclear weapon. Kennedy was strongly against this development. He was in favor of the principle of non proliferation and was afraid that an Israli nuclear force would complicate arms negotiations with the Soviet Union. That’s why he started putting pressure on Israel’s prime minister Ben Goerion, to allow inspection of the nuclear facilities of Israel at Dimona in the Negev desert. When Israel kept refusing this, Isaeli/American relations went downhill. Kennedy was seen at hetime as a main obstacle to Israeli security. His death worked out as a solution for the zionist elite concerning the Israeli nuclear ambitions, since Lyndon B.Johnson never askd any questions about this. This was all together reason enough for the zionist lobby in the US to enter the alliance against Kennedy. In day-to-day routine this came down to a zionist/Mossad involvement in Permindex, such as through the financing of Rosenbaum’s BCI.

A key figure in the board of directors of Permindex was the lawyer Roy Cohn, who was probably the most fierce anticommunist in the crowd connected to this company. In the early days of his career Cohn worked for the law company of CIA director Allen Dulles. Some time later he was the prosecutor in the trial against Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. Their death sentence was seen by Cohn as a big success. Cohn, who was attached to the ‘American Jewish league against communism’, also was a member of the McCarty Committee, that destroyed the lives of many innocent American citizens by accusing them of having communist sympathies.

In Permindex Cohn was the connection between several groups having something against Kennedy. Through his association with mafia hoods like Joseph Bonano (another Permindex board member) he represented organised crime within Permindex. But Cohn was also the connection between Permindex and the Hunts family, the rich oilers from Texas, whos were angry with Kennedy, because he cut their tax benifits. Cohn was also very close with J.Edgar Hoover, the director of the FBI, who saw Kennedy as his main enemy. Hoover was on the point of being fired, like Kennedy did with Allen Dulles. The death of Kennedy made Hoover remaining his position as FBI director.

Other Permindex board members like Clay Shaw and Louis Mortimer Bloomfield peviously had worked for the secret FBI department ‘Division Five’. ‘Pastsy’ Lee Harvey Oswald also worked for Division Five, which became infamous for it’s ‘Cointelpro’, a program aimed at criminalising leftish organisations and black moslim groups. The assassination of Kennedy can be seen as an operation being part of Cointelpro, because criminalising communism was one of the objectives of killing the American president. All the groups involved in this event agreed on this point. After Kennedy got killed a disinformation program started in which the blame was put on (Soviet) communism. In this Oswald appeared as a communist, while in fact he had more contacts in the direction of the far right.

During Cointelpro the Divison Five department of the FBI cooperated with the anti Defamation league of B’nai B’rith (ADL), an organisation representing the interests of Israel in, among other countries, the USA. In its relation with the jewish state, ADL is often mentioned in relation to the Mossad, which on itself was connected in those years by people like CIA agent James Jezus Angleton.

This synopsis gives an impression of the headlines being described in De Moordvrienden, because it is impossible to summarize all the topics being decribed here in just a few pages. Some of the other topics that can’t be described here in full lenght are:

the interests of the weapon industry in the assassination of Kennedy.

Defense Industry Security Command.

the interests of Prince Bernhard’s former employer IG Farben, in the nuclear (weapon) industry.

the intended visit from Kennedy to Indonesia and the interests of Prince Bernhard’s Bilderbergers in this former Dutch colony.

the attempt of Prince Bernhard to have Queen Juliana locked up in a mental hospital, through the so-called ‘Greet Hofmans affair’.

the assassinations of Robert Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, ANC leader Chris Hani, the Maroccan opposition leader Benn Barka and the Italian energy minister Enrico Mattei.

the coalation between the Mossad, the CIA, the French secret service and the Organisation Armee Secret behind the assaults on De Gaulle.

the drugstrade of the Nixon family.

the relations between the Lockheed and Watergate scandals.

the relation between Oswald ‘babysitter’ George de Mohrenschildt and the Dutch journalist Willem Oltmans.

the Valachi papers.

the Souvereign and military Order of Malta

Christine Keeler and Soviet espionage.

the involvement of nazi scientist Werner von Braun in permindex.

the connection between legal casino’s in the Neherlands and the Meyer Lansky criminal empire.

Intertel and the inheritance of Permindex.

De Moordvrienden concludes by stating that Kennedy was not killed by one person, or one group of persons. Instead this American President was assassinated by an international network, representing several anti communist groups, pointing in the direction of Anglosaxon intelligence agencies, zionist organisations and structures left behind by nazi’s and other far right European circles.

It remains a question how much knowledge Prince Bernhard had of Kennedy’s death. In those days he certainly had a prominent position in the anti communist network, that became so manifest in the theories surrounding the Kennedy assassination. Besides that the prince has been in contact with numerous people that came forward in the investigation of New Orleans district attorney Jim Garrison, not only in the direction of the Anglosaxon agencies, but towards zionist organisations as well. But De Moordvrienden also shows that the prince had much to gain from the death of Kennedy, especialliy when it came to the interests of his buddies in the military industrial complex and Bilderberg.

So, allthough his name is never mentioned before by researchers of the Kennedy assassination, according to De Moordvrienden, there is reason enough to associate Bernhard with the death of John F. Kennedy. Because much of his illegal practices are of course being covered by his royal appearance, we are left with several possibilities. In the first place it’s centainly possible that Prince Bernhard still has some secret knowledge concerning the Kennedy assassination. It’s even possible that he had some kind of role in this event, like his friends Rosenbaum and Dulles did. Another possibility is that he played a role in this without having knowdledge of it himself and that he was used on the basis of the ‘need-to-know’ principle, by regions above him. The chance that this happened doesn’t seem to be large, but it’s a possibility, since Bernhard was ‘sacrificed’ later on through the lockheed scandal, which was attached on itself to the downfall of Rosenbaum’s BCI. But all cases the name of Prince Bernhard should be put on the list of people, who together form the landscape surrounding the Kennedy assassination. This is the main point De moordvrienden wants to make.


The Missing Link In The JFK Assassination Conspiracy




More Evidence Mossad Killed JFK Over Israeli Nukes

The Missing Link In The JFK Assassination Conspiracy

(Note - The second item below is a letter from JFK to Israeli

Prime Minister Eshkol which makes it crystal clear JFK did NOT want the

Jewish state to develop nuclear weapons and that he was demanding regular US inspections of the Dimona Nuclear facility...which, as we now know, was/is used to develop Israel's enormous inventory of atomic and thermonuclear weapons. The US Air Force white paper regarding past and ongoing Israeli thermonuclear blackmail of the US is a stunning look at how Zionism has exerted such staggering domination over the US for decades. -ed)

After reading: "New JFK Assassination Theory" from WND, it is obvious that it is just more dis-information diverting attention away from the more than likely perpetrators, the Mossad.

It's only fair to remind or inform your readers of the theory posed by Michael Collins Piper in 'Final Judgment'. His theory makes more sense than anything.

Final Judgement Reviewed by Mark Braver

There seems to be a lot of misperception of what Final Judgment does and does not say about the JFK assassination. The book does not say that "the Jews killed JFK." That's horse manure.

What the book does say is that: When New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison charged businessman Clay Shaw with participation in the JFK assassination conspiracy Garrison stumbled upon the Israeli Mossad connection to the murder of President Kennedy. Shaw served on the board of a shadowy corporation known as Permindex. A primary shareholder in Permindex was the Banque De Credit International of Geneva, founded by Tibor Rosenbaum, an arms procurer and financier for the Mossad.

What's more, the Mossad-sponsored Swiss bank was the chief "money laundry" for Meyer Lansky, the head of the international crime syndicate and an Israeli loyalist whose operations meshed closely on many fronts with the American CIA.

The chairman of Permindex was Louis M. Bloomfield of Montreal, a key figure in the Israeli lobby and an operative of the Bronfman family of Canada, long-time Lansky associates and among Israel's primary international patrons.

In the pages of "Final Judgment" the Israeli connection to the JFK assassination is explored in frightening--and fully documented--detail. For example, did you know:

That JFK was engaged in a bitter secret conflict with Israel over U.S. East policy and that Israel's prime minister resigned in disgust, saying JFK's stance threatened Israel's very survival?

That JFK's successor, Lyndon Johnson, immediately reversed America's policy toward Israel?

That the top Mafia figures often alleged to be behind the JFK assassination were only front men for Meyer Lansky?

That the CIA's liaison to the Mossad, James Angleton, was a prime mover behind the cover-up of the JFK assassination?

Why didn't Oliver Stone, in his famous movie "JFK" not mention any of this? It turns out the chief financial backer of Stone's film was longtime Mossad figure, Arnon Milchan, Israel's biggest arms dealer.

The very fact that the Israeli lobby has gone through such great lengths to try to smear Michael Collins Piper and to try to discredit Final Judgment gives the book great credibility. If the book was really so silly or so unconvincing, it doesn't seem likely that groups such as the Anti-Defamation League would go out of their way to try to suppress the book as they have.

The fact is that Piper demonstrates that Israel did indeed have a very strong motive to want to get JFK out of the way and that numerous people who have been linked in other writings to the JFK conspiracy were (as Piper documents) also in the sphere of influence of Israel's Mossad.

Not only Clay Shaw in New Orleans, but also James Angleton at the CIA, who was Israel's strongest advocate at the CIA and also the CIA's liaison to the Mossad. The Israeli connection is indeed "the missing link in the JFK assassination conspiracy."

The "Reader from Chicago" who wrote the review of Final Judgment posted here is really off the beam and I suspect he (or she) is deliberately distorting what Piper's book does say in order to try to discourage people from reading it.

The fact is that Piper's book documents (quite clearly, in my estimation) not only the means, opportunity and the motive for Israeli Mossad involvement in the assassination (working in conjunction with the CIA), but it is also quite fascinating and very interesting read. "Boring" is the last word I'd use to describe the book, and it is certainly not "poorly written."

What's more, the book is not--I repeat--not "anti-Semitic" and the book has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the subject of the Holocaust. In fact, anybody familiar with any of the standard writings on the JFK assassination will recognize the names of some of the key players in the scenario Piper documents: Clay Shaw, David Ferrie, Guy Banister and James J. Angleton of the CIA--and none of them were Jewish. So where this reviewer gets off saying that Piper finds "a Jew under every rock" is beyond me. I have read literally hundreds of books and magazine articles and other material on the JFK assassination and not in a single one of them--with the exception of Final Judgment--did I ever learn that President John F. Kennedy was trying to stop Israel from building the nuclear bomb and that this literally touched off a "secret war" behind the scenes between JFK and Israel's prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, who resigned (among other reasons) in disgust over JFK's policies withsrael. In fact, Israeli historian Avner Cohen in his book, Israel and the Bomb, documents this quite thoroughly.

And in Final Judgment Piper also outlines some interesting Israeli connections by people who have been linked to the JFK assassination and cover-up, including Clay Shaw of New Orleans. Even Israeli journalist Barry Chamish has written in an Internet review of Final Judgment that he finds Piper's Israeli connection (via Shaw and Permindex) quite convincing.

There was a controversy in the Chicago area following an attempt by the Anti-Defamation League (an Israeli lobby organization) and people associated with the ADL to prevent Final Judgment from being placed in the Schaumburg Township District Library. Chances are the Reader from Chicago is probably an ADL representative! --This text refers to the Unknown Binding edition.


JFK's Concern Over Israel's Nuclear Bomb Program

JFK's Letter To Israeli PM Eshkol July 5, 1963

Dear Mr. Prime Minister (Eshkol),

It gives me great personal pleasure to extend congratulations as you assume your responsibilities as Prime Minister of Israel. You have our friendship and best wishes in your new tasks. It is on one of these that I am writing you at this time.

You are aware, I am sure, of the exchange which I had with Prime Minister Ben-Gurion concerning American visits (ie: inspections -ed) to Israel's nuclear facility at Dimona. Most recently, the Prime Minister wrote to me on May 27. His words reflected a most intense personal consideration of a problem that I know is not easy for your Government, as it is not for mine. We welcomed the former Prime Minister's strong reaffirmation that Dimona will be devoted exclusively to peaceful purposes and the reaffirmation also of Israel's willingness to permit periodic visits (ie: inspections -ed) to Dimona.

I regret having to add to your burdens so soon after your assumption of office, but I feel the crucial importance of this problem necessitates my taking up with you at this early date certain further considerations, arising out of Mr. Ben-Gurion's May 27 letter, as to the nature and scheduling of such visits.

I am sure you will agree that these visits should be as nearly as possible in accord with international standards, thereby resolving all doubts as to the peaceful intent of the Dimona project. As I wrote Mr. Ben-Gurion, this Government's commitment to and support of Israel could be seriously jeopardized if it should be thought that we were unable to obtain reliable information on a subject as vital to the peace as the question of Israel's effort in the nuclear field.

Therefore, I asked our scientists to review the alternative schedules of visits we and you had proposed. If Israel's purposes are to be clear beyond reasonable doubt, I believe that the schedule which would best serve our common purposes would be a visit early this summer, another visit in June 1964, and thereafter at intervals of six months. I am sure that such a schedule should not cause you any more difficulty than that which Mr. Ben-Gurion proposed in his May 27 letter. It would be essential, and I understand that Mr. Ben-Gurion's letter was in accord with this, that our scientist have access to all areas of the Dimona site and to any related part of the complex, such as fuel fabrication facilities or plutonium separation plant, and that sufficient time to be allotted for a thorough examination.

Knowing that you fully appreciate the truly vital significance of this matter to the future well-being of Israel, to the United States, and internationally, I am sure our carefully considered request will have your most sympathetic attention.


John F. Kennedy



Then tie in this, and you at the top of the kill JFK planners:

Solving the JFK hit is really as simple as connecting the godfathers of the Mossad to their Talmudist Rabbi Tibor Rosenbaum Mossad/Mafia bank, then PERMINDEX with Nagy, Mandel, Bloomfield. This is the high command for the JFK hit. Lots of it ties back to Hungary, some to IG Farbins NW 7 outfit that became the "Defense Industrial Security Command" system in the US version implementation run by Bloomfield for Hoover and Div 5.


Mossad And The JFK Assassination

"Israel need not apologize for the assassination

or destruction of those who seek to destroy it.

The first order of business for any country

is the protection of its people."

Washington Jewish Week, October 9, 1997

John-F-Kennedy.net Message Board

Post | Read

In March, 1992, Illinois Representative Paul Findley said in The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, "It is interesting - but not surprising - to note that in all the words written and uttered about the Kennedy assassination, Israel's intelligence agency, the Mossad, has never been mentioned."

Considering that the Mossad is quite possibly the most ruthless and efficient intelligence agency in the world, it is peculiar that they have never been scrutinized in relation to the Kennedy assassination, especially when practically every other entity in the world (short of Elvis impersonators) has been implicated. But that all changed in January, 1994 with the release of Michael Collins Piper's Final Judgment. In this book, Piper says, "Israel's Mossad was a primary (and critical) behind the scenes player in the conspiracy that ended the life of JFK. Through its own vast resources and through its international contacts in the intelligence community and in organized crime, Israel had the means, it had the opportunity, and it had the motive to play a major frontline role in the crime of the century - and it did."

Their motive? Israel's much touted Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion, who ruled that country from its inception in 1948 until he resigned on June 16, 1963, was so enraged at John F. Kennedy for not allowing Israel to become a nuclear power that, Collins asserts, in his final days in office he commanded the Mossad to become involved in a plot to kill America's president.

Ben-Gurion was so convinced that Israel's very survival was in dire jeopardy that in one of his final letters to JFK he said, "Mr. President, my people have the right to exist, and this existence is in danger."

In the days leading up to Ben-Gurion's resignation from office, he and JFK had been involved in an unpublicized, contentious debate over the possibility of Israel getting nuclear capabilities. Their disagreement eventually escalated into a full-fledged war of words that was virtually ignored in the press. Ethan Bronner wrote about this secret battle between JFK and Ben-Gurion years later in a New York Times article on October 31, 1998, calling it a "fiercely hidden subject." In fact, the Kennedy/Ben-Gurion conversations are still classified by the United States Government. Maybe this is the case because Ben-Gurion's rage and frustration became so intense - and his power so great within Israel - that Piper contends it was at the center of the conspiracy to kill John Kennedy. This stance is supported by New York banker Abe Feinberg, who describes the situation as such: "Ben-Gurion could be vicious, and he had such a hatred of the old man [Joe Kennedy, Sr., JFK's father]." Ben-Gurion despised Joe Kennedy because he felt that not only was he an anti-Semite, but that he had also sided with Hitler during the 1930's and 40's. [We will touch upon this aspect of the story in an upcoming article entitled The CIA and Organized Crime: Two Sides of the Same Coin].

Anyway, Ben-Gurion was convinced that Israel needed nuclear weapons to insure its survival, while Kennedy was dead-set against it. This inability to reach an agreement caused obvious problems. One of them revolved around Kennedy's decision that he would make America his top priority in regard to foreign policy, and not Israel! Kennedy planned to honor the 1950 Tripartite Declaration which said that the United States would retaliate against any nation in the Middle East that attacked any other country. Ben-Gurion, on the other hand, wanted the Kennedy Administration to sell them offensive weapons, particularly Hawk missiles.

The two leaders thus engaged in a brutal letter exchange, but Kennedy wouldn't budge. Ben-Gurion, obsessed by this issue, slipped into total paranoia, feeling that Kennedy's obstinance was a blatant threat to the very existence of Israel as a nation. Piper writes, "Ben-Gurion had devoted a lifetime creating a Jewish State and guiding it into the world arena. And, in Ben-Gurion's eyes, John F. Kennedy was an enemy of the Jewish people and his beloved state of Israel." He continues, "The 'nuclear option' was not only at the very core of Ben-Gurion's personal world view, but the very foundation of Israel's national security policy."

Ben-Gurion was so preoccupied with obtaining nuclear weapons that on June 27, 1963, eleven days after resigning from office, he announced, "I do not know of any other nation whose neighbors declare that they wish to terminate it, and not only declare, but prepare for it by all means available to them. We must have no illusions that what is declared every day in Cairo, Damascus, and Iraq are just words. This is the thought that guides the Arab leaders … I am confident … that science is able to provide us with the weapons that will serve the peace and deter our enemies."

Avner Cohen, in Israel and the Bomb, published by Columbia University Press, reinforces this sense of urgency by writing, "Imbued with lessons of the Holocaust, Ben-Gurion was consumed by fears of security … Anxiety about the Holocaust reached beyond Ben-Gurion to infuse Israel's military thinking." He further adds fuel to this point by pointing out, "Ben-Gurion had no qualms about Israel's need for weapons of mass destruction," and "Ben-Gurion's world view and his decisive governing style shaped his critical role in instigating Israel's nuclear progress."

Kennedy, on the other hand, was adamant in his refusal to promote Israel's ascension to the nuclear stage. Avener Cohen, in Israel and the Bomb, stresses, "No American president was more concerned with the danger of nuclear proliferation than John Fitzgerald Kennedy. He was convinced that the spread of nuclear weapons would make the world more dangerous and undermine U.S. interests." Cohen continues at the end of this passage, "The only example Kennedy used to make this point was Israel."

Realizing that Kennedy would not change his mind, Ben-Gurion decided to join forces with Communist China. Both countries were greatly interested in creating nuclear programs, and so began their secret joint dealings. Working in unison through intermediary Shaul Eisenberg, who was a partner of Mossad gun-runner and accountant Tibor Rosenbaum, Israel and China proceeded to develop their own nuclear capabilities without the knowledge of the United States.

If you find this scenario improbable, I strongly urge you to read Gordon Thomas' excellent book, Seeds of Fire, where he exposes how the Mossad and CSIS (Chinese secret service) have conspired on many occasions to not only steal American military secrets, but to also doctor U.S. intelligence programs such as the Justice Department's PROMISE software. This instance, I am afraid to say, is but the first where echoes of the JFK assassination can still be felt today reverberating through our post 9-11 world. The danger of Israel developing the Bomb in unison with China became a highly volatile situation, and was closely monitored by the CIA.

Intent on pursuing this path, the Israeli's constructed a nuclear facility at Dimona. When Kennedy demanded that the U.S. inspect this plant, Ben-Gurion was so incensed that he erected another PHONY facility that held no evidence of nuclear research and development. (Does this scenario sound eerily familiar to the game we're playing with Saddam Hussein in Iraq right now?) Fully aware of their shenanigans, though, JFK told Charles Bartlett, "The sons of bitches lie to me constantly about their nuclear capability."

Avner Cohen, in Israel and the Bomb, reiterates this claim by saying that Ben-Gurion had taken the nuclear issue so closely to heart that he, "concluded that he could not tell the truth about Dimona to American leaders, not even in private."

Dr. Gerald M. Steinberg, political science professor at Bar-Ilan University's BESA Center for Strategic Studies in Tel Aviv, weighs in by saying, "Between 1961 and 1963, the Kennedy administration placed a great deal of pressure on Ben-Gurion in the effort to pressure for acceptance of international inspection of Dimona and Israeli abdication of their nuclear weapons. This pressure apparently did not alter Israeli policy, but it was a contributing factor to Ben-Gurion's resignation in 1963."

To convey how serious this situation had become in modern terms, look at what is happening in Iraq with United Nations security teams inspecting the royal palaces and bunkers for nuclear weapons and materials. This matter is so urgent that our nation is on the verge of war. Forty years earlier, the heat that JFK was placing on Ben-Gurion was equally as strong as what George Bush is laying on Saddam Hussein today.

In Israel and the Bomb, Avner Cohen reinforces this point. "To force Ben-Gurion to accept the conditions, Kennedy exerted the most useful leverage available to an American president in dealing with Israel: a threat that an unsatisfactory solution would jeopardize the U.S. government's commitment to, and support of, Israel."

The pressure on Ben-Gurion was so immense that he ended up leaving office. But Kennedy, in true pit-bull style, didn't let up on Ben-Gurion's successor, Levi Eshkol, as Avner Cohen reports. "Kennedy told Eshkol that the U.S. commitment and support of Israel 'could be seriously jeopardized' if Israel did not let the U.S. obtain 'reliable information' about its efforts in the nuclear field. Kennedy's demands were unprecedented. They amounted, in effect, to an ultimatum." Cohen concludes this thought by asserting, "Kennedy's letter precipitated a near-crisis situation in Eshkol's office."

In the end, as we're all aware, Kennedy was assassinated in November 1963; but less known is that China conducted its first nuclear test in October, 1964. What makes this event more profound is Piper's claim that even though Israel said its first nuclear tests took place in 1979, they actually occurred in October, 1964 along with the Chinese! If this is true, other than August, 1945 when the United States dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, October 1964 may possibly be the most dangerous month in 20th century history.

Let's return, though, to JFK's assassination and the direct results of it in regard to the Jewish lobby, American foreign policy, and the militarization of Israel. To understand how powerful the Israeli lobby is in this country, venerable Senator J. William Fulbright told CBS Face the Nation on April 15, 1973, "Israel controls the U.S. Senate. The Senate is subservient, much too much; we should be more concerned about U.S. interests rather than doing the bidding of Israel. The great majority of the Senate of the U.S. - somewhere around 80% - is completely in support of Israel; anything Israel wants; Israel gets. This has been demonstrated time and again, and this has made [foreign policy] difficult for our government."

Do you hear what Senator Fulbright said? This isn't a crazy conspiracy theorist or a KKK anti-Semite. It's a much-respected U.S. Senator saying that about 80% of the Senate is in Israel's hip pocket. Adding clout to this argument is Rep. Paul Findley, who was quoted in The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs in March, 1992, "During John Kennedy's campaign for the presidency, a group of New York Jews had privately offered to meet his campaign expenses if he would let them set his Middle East policy. He did not agree … As the president, he provided only limited support of Israel."

To understand how important Kennedy's decisions were during his short-lived presidency, we need to look at the issue of campaign finance. Considering how influential the Israeli lobby is in the U.S. Senate (hearkening back to the words of Senator Fulbright), they had to have been enraged when President Kennedy genuinely wanted to cut the knees out from under the current campaign finance methods because it made politicians so reliant upon the huge cash inlays of special-interest groups. Regrettably, Kennedy did not have the time to implement this program, and to this day our political system is still monopolized by lobbyists from the very same special-interest groups. One can only imagine what changes would have occurred in regard to our foreign policy had Kennedy eradicated these vipers and blood-suckers from the halls of Congress.

Tragically, Kennedy's ideas never came to fruition, and his heated battle with Prime Minister Ben-Gurion over whether Israel should be allowed to develop a nuclear program was ultimately lost. The reason why is that Lyndon Baines Johnson, who Kennedy intended to drop from his ticket in 1964 due to his extreme dislike for, had a complete reversal in foreign policy. As you will see, not only did Israel's nuclear program move ahead unchecked; they also became the primary beneficiary of our foreign aid.

But this absolute turnaround would not have occurred if Kennedy would not have been assassinated. Up until LBJ became president, Kennedy dealt with the Middle East in a way that most benefited the U.S. His primary goal - and one which would most keep the peace - was a balance of power in the Middle East so that each and every nation would be secure. This decision adhered to the Tripartite Declaration which the U.S. signed in 1950. But under the Johnson administration, this fragile balance was overturned, and by 1967 - only four years after Kennedy's assassination - the U.S. was Israel's main weapons supplier, and OUR best interests were put well behind those of Israel!

As Michael Collins Piper writes: "The bottom line is this: JFK was adamantly determined to stop Israel from building the nuclear bomb. LBJ simply looked the other way. JFK's death did indeed prove beneficial to Israel's nuclear ambitions and the evidence proves it."

Reuven Pedatzer, in a review of Avner Cohen's Israel and the Bomb, in the Israeli Newspaper Ha'aretz on February 5, 1999 wrote, "The murder of American president John F. Kennedy brought to an abrupt end the massive pressure being applied by the U.S. administration on the government of Israel to discontinue their nuclear program." He continues, "Kennedy made it quite clear to the Israeli Prime Minister that he would not under any circumstances agree to Israel becoming a nuclear state." Pedatzer concludes, "Had Kennedy remained alive, it is doubtful whether Israel would today have a nuclear option," and that, "Ben-Gurion's decision to resign in 1963 was taken to a large extent against the background of the tremendous pressure that Kennedy was applying on him concerning the nuclear issue."

If you're still not convinced; how about some numbers? In Kennedy's last fiscal budget year of 1964, Israeli aid was $40 million. In LBJ's first budget of 1965, it soared to $71 million, and in 1966 more than tripled from two years earlier to $130 million! Plus, during Kennedy's administration, almost none of our aid to Israel was military in nature. Instead, it was split equally between development loans and food assistance under the PL480 Program. Yet in 1965 under the Johnson administration, 20% of our aid to Israel was for the military, while in 1966, 71% was used for war-related materials.

Continuing in this same vein, in 1963 the Kennedy administration sold 5 Hawk missiles to Israel as part of an air-defense system. In 1965-66, though, LBJ laid 250 tanks on Israel, 48 Skyhawk attack aircrafts, plus guns and artillery which were all offensive in nature. If you ever wondered when the Israeli War Machine was created, this is it! LBJ was its father.

According to Stephen Green in Taking Sides: America's Secret Relations with a Militant Israel, "The $92 million in military assistance provided in fiscal year 1966 was greater than the total of all official military aid provided to Israel cumulatively in all the years going back to the foundation of that nation in 1948."

Green continues, "70% of all U.S. official assistance to Israel has been military. America has given Israel over $17 billion in military aid since 1946, virtually all of which - over 99% - has been provided since 1965."

Can you see what's happening here? Within two years of JFK's assassination, Israel went from being a weak, outmatched member of the volatile Middle Eastern community that was not allowed to develop nuclear weapons to one that was well on its way to becoming a undeniable military force on the world stage. John Kennedy adamantly put his foot down and refused to allow Israel to develop a nuclear program, while LBJ bent over backward to facilitate and bolster them. Or, as Seymour Hersh wrote in The Samson Option, "By 1968, the president had no intention of doing anything to stop the Israeli bomb."

The result of this shift in focus from the Kennedy to Johnson administration is, in my opinion, the PRIMARY reason behind our current troubles in the Middle East which culminated in the 9-11 attacks and our upcoming war with Iraq (and beyond). I have a great deal of confidence in this statement, for as Michael Collins Piper points out, here are the results of John F. Kennedy's assassination:

1) Our foreign and military aid to Israel increased dramatically once LBJ became president.

2) Rather than trying to maintain a BALANCE in the Middle East, Israel suddenly emerged as the dominant force.

3) Since the LBJ administration, Israel has always had weaponry that was superior to any of its direct neighbors.

4) Due to this undeniable and obvious increase in Israel's War Machine, a constant struggle has been perpetuated in the Middle East.

5) LBJ also allowed Israel to proceed with its nuclear development, resulting in them becoming the 6th largest nuclear force in the world.

6) Finally, our huge outlays of foreign aid to Israel (approximately $10 billion/year when all is said and done) has created a situation of never-ending attacks and retaliation in the Middle East, plus outright scorn and enmity against the U.S. for playing the role of Israel's military enabler.

In Israel's, and especially David Ben-Gurion's eyes then, what were their alternatives - to remain weakened (or at least balanced) in relation to their neighbors and handcuffed by JFK's refusal to bow to their will, or KILL the one man standing in their way to becoming dominant in the Middle East, the recipient of huge amounts of military aid, and one of the premier nuclear forces in the world? It's something to think about. Also, while these thoughts are running through your head, ask yourself this question. If Kennedy, LBJ, and all subsequent administrations would have adhered to the 1950 Tripartite Declaration and did everything in their power to maintain balance in the Middle East instead of pushing Israel to the forefront, would our Towers have been attacked on 9-11, 2001, and would we be on the verge of a possibly catastrophic war today? It's certainly something to ponder.


And for a little icing on the cake, connect this:

Isn't it interesting that the main person, Talmudist Rabbi Tibor Rosenbaum, behind PERMINDEX isn't listed in WikiPedia nor the Education Forum JFK area. And he ties together Meyer Lansky and ole Jack Ruby.

Really, all Oak Ridge had to do to get JFK killed is tell Jack Ruby how to make these connections and JFK was a dead man. JFK interfered with Oak Ridge highly Jewish controlled Nuclear Business via the Atmospheric test ban, but keeping Israel from building their bomb for JFK world peace plan was not part of their Cabalistic plan. You have the high command in the plot to kill JFK. It is highly ZIonist oriented, highly Masonic 33rd degree fueled, and engages in all methods for deceit and treachery to keep the American people's Freedoms suppressed for Crooked goals.

Lee Harvey Oswald learns of the big Jewish plans to Kill JFK at Oak Ridge on July 26, 1963



President John F. Kennedy

The White House

July 26, 1963

Good evening, my fellow citizens:

I speak to you tonight in a spirit of hope. Eighteen years ago the advent of nuclear weapons changed the course of the world as well as the war. Since that time, all mankind has been struggling to escape from the darkening prospect of mass destruction on earth. In an age when both sides have come to possess enough nuclear power to destroy the human race several times over, the world of communism and the world of free choice have been caught up in a vicious circle of conflicting ideology and interest. Each increase of tension has produced an increase of arms; each increase of arms has produced an increase of tension.

In these years, the United States and the Soviet Union have frequently communicated suspicion and warnings to each other, but very rarely hope. Our representatives have met at the summit and at the brink; they have met in Washington and in Moscow; in Geneva and at the United Nations. But too often these meetings have produced only darkness, discord, or disillusion.

Yesterday a shaft of light cut into the darkness. Negotiations were concluded in Moscow on a treaty to ban all nuclear tests in the atmosphere, in outer space, and under water. For the first time, an agreement has been reached on bringing the forces of nuclear destruction under international control-a goal first sought in 1946 when Bernard Baruch presented a comprehensive control plan to the United Nations.

That plan, and many subsequent disarmament plans, large and small, have all been blocked by those opposed to international inspection. A ban on nuclear tests, however, requires on-the-spot inspection only for underground tests. This Nation now possesses a variety of techniques to detect the nuclear tests of other nations which are conducted in the air or under water, for such tests produce unmistakable signs which our modern instruments can pick up.

The treaty initialed yesterday, therefore, is a limited treaty which permits continued underground testing and prohibits only those tests that we ourselves can police. It requires no control posts, no onsite inspection, no international body.

We should also understand that it has other limits as well. Any nation which signs the treaty will have an opportunity to withdraw if it finds that extraordinary events related to the subject matter of the treaty have jeopardized its supreme interests; and no nation's right of self-defense will in any way be impaired. Nor does this treaty mean an end to the threat of nuclear war. It will not reduce nuclear stockpiles; it will not halt the production of nuclear weapons; it will not restrict their use in time of war.

Nevertheless, this limited treaty will radically reduce the nuclear testing which would otherwise be conducted on both sides; it will prohibit the United States, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, and all others who sign it, from engaging in the atmospheric tests which have so alarmed mankind; and it offers to all the world a welcome sign of hope.

For this is not a unilateral moratorium, but a specific and solemn legal obligation. While it will not prevent this Nation from testing underground, or from being ready to conduct atmospheric tests if the acts of others so require, it gives us a concrete opportunity to extend its coverage to other nations and later to other forms of nuclear tests.

This treaty is in part the product of Western patience and vigilance. We have made clear--most recently in Berlin and Cuba--our deep resolve to protect our security and our freedom against any form of aggression. We have also made clear our steadfast determination to limit the arms race. In three administrations, our soldiers and diplomats have worked together to this end, always supported by Great Britain. Prime Minister Macmillan joined with President Eisenhower in proposing a limited test ban in 1959, and again with me in 1961 and 1962.

But the achievement of this goal is not a victory for one side--it is a victory for mankind. It reflects no concessions either to or by the Soviet Union. It reflects simply our common recognition of the dangers in further testing.

This treaty is not the millennium. It will not resolve all conflicts, or cause the Communists to forego their ambitions, or eliminate the dangers of war. It will not reduce our need for arms or allies or programs of assistance to others. But it is an important first step--a step towards peace--a step towards reason--a step away from war.

Here is what this step can mean to you and to your children and your neighbors:

First, this treaty can be a step towards reduced world tension and broader areas of agreement. The Moscow talks have reached no agreement on any other subject, nor is this treaty conditioned on any other matter. Under Secretary Harriman made it clear that any nonaggression arrangements across the division in Europe would require full consultation with our allies and full attention to their interests. He also made clear our strong preference for a more comprehensive treaty banning all tests everywhere, and our ultimate hope for general and complete disarmament. The Soviet Government, however, is still unwilling to accept the inspection such goals require.

No one can predict with certainty, therefore, what further agreements, if any, can be built on the foundations of this one. They could include controls on preparations for surprise attack, or on numbers and type of armaments. There could be further limitations on the spread of nuclear weapons. The important point is that efforts to seek new agreements will go forward.

But the difficulty of predicting the next step is no reason to be reluctant about this step. Nuclear test ban negotiations have long been a symbol of East-West disagreement. If this treaty can also be a symbol--if it can symbolize the end of one era and the beginning of another--if both sides can by this treaty gain confidence and experience in peaceful collaboration--then this short and simple treaty may well become an historic mark in man's age-old pursuit of peace.

Western policies have long been designed to persuade the Soviet Union to renounce aggression, direct or indirect, so that their people and all people may live and let live in peace. The unlimited testing of new weapons of war cannot lead towards that end--but this treaty, if it can be followed by further progress, can clearly move in that direction.

I do not say that a world without aggression or threats of war would be an easy world. It will bring new problems, new challenges from the Communists, new dangers of relaxing our vigilance or of mistaking their intent.

But those dangers pale in comparison to those of the spiraling arms race and a collision course towards war. Since the beginning of history, war has been mankind's constant companion. It has been the rule, not the exception. Even a nation as young and as peace-loving as our own has fought through eight wars. And three times in the last two years and a half I have been required to report to you as President that this Nation and the Soviet Union stood on the verge of direct military confrontation--in Laos, in Berlin, and in Cuba.

A war today or tomorrow, if it led to nuclear war, would not be like any war in history. A full-scale nuclear exchange, lasting less than 60 minutes, with the weapons now in existence, could wipe out more than 300 million Americans, Europeans, and Russians, as well as untold numbers elsewhere. And the survivors, as Chairman Khrushchev warned the Communist Chinese, "the survivors would envy the dead." For they would inherit a world so devastated by explosions and poison and fire that today we cannot even conceive of its horrors. So let us try to turn the world away from war. Let us make the most of this opportunity, and every opportunity, to reduce tension, to slow down the perilous nuclear arms race, and to check the world's slide toward final annihilation.

Second, this treaty can be a step towards freeing the world from the fears and dangers of radioactive fallout. Our own atmospheric tests last year were conducted under conditions which restricted such fallout to an absolute minimum. But over the years the number and the yield of weapons tested have rapidly increased and so have the radioactive hazards from such testing. Continued unrestricted testing by the nuclear powers, joined in time by other nations which may be less adept in limiting pollution, will increasingly contaminate the air that all of us must breathe.

Even then, the number of children and grandchildren with cancer in their bones, with leukemia in their blood, or with poison in their lungs might seem statistically small to some, in comparison with natural health hazards. But this is not a natural health hazard--and it is not a statistical issue. The loss of even one human life, or the malformation of even one baby--who may be born long after we are gone--should be of concern to us all. Our children and grandchildren are not merely statistics toward which we can be indifferent.

Nor does this affect the nuclear powers alone. These tests befoul the air of all men and all nations, the committed and the uncommitted alike, without their knowledge and without their consent. That is why the continuation of atmospheric testing causes so many countries to regard all nuclear powers as equally evil; and we can hope that its prevention will enable those countries to see the world more clearly, while enabling all the world to breathe more easily.

Third, this treaty can be a step toward preventing the spread of nuclear weapons to nations not now possessing them. During the next several years, in addition to the four current nuclear powers, a small but significant number of nations will have the intellectual, physical, and financial resources to produce both nuclear weapons and the means of delivering them. In time, it is estimated, many other nations will have either this capacity or other ways of obtaining nuclear warheads, even as missiles can be commercially purchased today.

I ask you to stop and think for a moment what it would mean to have nuclear weapons in so many hands, in the hands of countries large and small, stable and unstable, responsible and irresponsible, scattered throughout the world. There would be no rest for anyone then, no stability, no real security, and no chance of effective disarmament. There would only be the increased chance of accidental war, and an increased necessity for the great powers to involve themselves in what otherwise would be local conflicts.

If only one thermonuclear bomb were to be dropped on any American, Russian, or any other city, whether it was launched by accident or design, by a madman or by an enemy, by a large nation or by a small, from any corner of the world, that one bomb could release more destructive power on the inhabitants of that one helpless city than all the bombs dropped in the Second World War.

Neither the United States nor the Soviet Union nor the United Kingdom nor France can look forward to that day with equanimity. We have a great obligation, all four nuclear powers have a great obligation, to use whatever time remains to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, to persuade other countries not to test, transfer, acquire, possess, or produce such weapons.

This treaty can be the opening wedge in that campaign. It provides that none of the parties will assist other nations to test in the forbidden environments. It opens the door for further agreements on the control of nuclear weapons, and it is open for all nations to sign, for it is in the interest of all nations, and already we have heard from a number of countries who wish to join with us promptly.

Fourth and finally, this treaty can limit the nuclear arms race in ways which, on balance, will strengthen our Nation's security far more than the continuation of unrestricted testing. For in today's world, a nation's security does not always increase as its arms increase, when its adversary is doing the same, and unlimited competition in the testing and development of new types of destructive nuclear weapons will not make the world safer for either side. Under this limited treaty, on the other hand, the testing of other nations could never be sufficient to offset the ability of our strategic forces to deter or survive a nuclear attack and to penetrate and destroy an aggressor's homeland.

We have, and under this treaty we will continue to have, the nuclear strength that we need. It is true that the Soviets have tested nuclear weapons of a yield higher than that which we thought to be necessary, but the hundred megaton bomb of which they spoke a years ago does not and will not change the balance of strategic power. The United States has chosen, deliberately, to concentrate on more mobile and more efficient weapons, with lower but entirely sufficient yield, and our security is, therefore, not impaired by the treaty I am discussing.

It is also true, as Mr. Khrushchev would agree, that nations cannot afford in these matters to rely simply on the good faith of their adversaries. We have not, therefore, overlooked the risk of secret violations. There is at present a possibility that deep in outer space, that hundreds and thousands and millions of miles away from the earth illegal tests might go undetected. But we already have the capability to construct a system of observation that would make such tests almost impossible to conceal, and we can decide at any time whether such a system is needed in the light of the limited risk to us and the limited reward to others of violations attempted at that range. For any tests which might be conducted so far out in space, which cannot be conducted more easily and efficiently and legally underground, would necessarily be of such a magnitude that they would be extremely difficult to conceal. We can also employ new devices to check on the testing of smaller weapons in the lower atmosphere. Any violations, moreover, involves, along with the risk of detection, the end of the treaty and the worldwide consequences for the violator.

Secret violations are possible and secret preparations for a sudden withdrawal are possible, and thus our own vigilance and strength must be maintained, as we remain ready to withdraw and to resume all forms of testing, if we must. But it would be a mistake to assume that this treaty will be quickly broken. The gains of illegal testing are obviously slight compared to their cost, and the hazard of discovery, and the nations which have initialed and will sign this treaty prefer it, in my judgment, to unrestricted testing as a matter of their own self-interests for these nations, too, and all nations, have a stake in limiting the arms race, in holding the spread of nuclear weapons, and in breathing air that is not radioactive. While it may be theoretically possible to demonstrate the risks inherent in any treaty, and such risks in this treaty are small, the far greater risks to our security are the risks of unrestricted testing, the risk of a nuclear arms race, the risk of new nuclear powers, nuclear pollution, and nuclear war.

This limited test ban, in our most careful judgment, is safer by far for the United States than an unlimited nuclear arms race. For all these reasons, I am hopeful that this Nation will promptly approve the limited test ban treaty. There will, of course, be debate in the country and in the Senate. The Constitution wisely requires the advice and consent of the Senate to all treaties, and that consultation has already begun. All this is as it should be. A document which may mark an historic and constructive opportunity for the world deserves an historic and constructive debate.

It is my hope that all of you will take part in that debate, for this treaty is for all of us. It is particularly for our children and our grandchildren, and they have no lobby here in Washington. This debate will involve military, scientific, and political experts, but it must be not left to them alone. The right and the responsibility are yours.

If we are to open new doorways to peace, if we are to seize this rare opportunity for progress, if we are to be as bold and farsighted in our control of weapons as we have been in their invention, then let us now show all the world on this side of the wall and the other that a strong America also stands for peace. There is no cause for complacency.

We have learned in times past that the spirit of one moment or place can be gone in the next. We have been disappointed more than once, and we have no illusions now that there are shortcuts on the road to peace. At many points around the globe the Communists are continuing their efforts to exploit weakness and poverty. Their concentration of nuclear and conventional arms must still be deterred.

The familiar contest between choice and coercion, the familiar places of danger and conflict, are all still there, in Cuba, in Southeast Asia, in Berlin, and all around the globe, still requiring all the strength and the vigilance that we can muster. Nothing could more greatly damage our cause than if we and our allies were to believe that peace has already been achieved, and that our strength and unity were no longer required.

But now, for the first time in many years, the path of peace may be open. No one can be certain what the future will bring. No one can say whether the time has come for an easing of the struggle. But history and our own conscience will judge us harsher if we do not now make every effort to test our hopes by action, and this is the place to begin.

According to the ancient Chinese proverb, "A journey of a thousand miles must begin with a single step."

My fellow Americans, let us take that first step. Let us, if we can, step back from the shadows of war and seek out the way of peace. And if that journey is a thousand miles, or even more, let history record that we, in this land, at this time, took the first step.

Thank you and good night.



















Edited by Jim Phelps
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I spent 20yrs with Detroit PD including two seperate tours in Homicide-having read all 26 volumes several times and a whole lot of other materials I can assure everybody the Dallas Investigation was a joke.

I've never read any dependable material that showed the relevance of drugs with Dallas. I had homicides involving drug dealers in Detroit where I talked to more people than Dallas Homicide did.

They never secured the crime scenes and never interviewed the whole DC crowd before they left town. They were either intimidated or bribed by the Feds and frankly I don't think Dallas Homicide AT THAT TIME could have found an elephant in a bath tub. Current Dallas Homicide has some really sharp folks.

Every witness to a crime has at least a few specks of gold on them and if they are approached correctly, that spek can lead to the mother load

Edited by Evan Marshall
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I spent 20yrs with Detroit PD including two seperate tours in Homicide-having read all 26 volumes several times and a whole lot of other materials I can assure everybody the Dallas Investigation was a joke.

I've never read any dependable material that showed the relevance of drugs with Dallas. I had homicides involving drug dealers in Detroit where I talked to more people than Dallas Homicide did.

They never secured the crime scenes and never interviewed the whole DC crowd before they left town. They were either intimidated or bribed by the Feds and frankly I don't think Dallas Homicide AT THAT TIME could have found an elephant in a bath tub. Current Dallas Homicide has some really sharp folks.

Every witness to a crime has at least a few specks of gold on them and if they are approached correctly, that spek can lead to the mother load

Evan, as you know, I've tried to apply real criminal investigative techniques to what happened at Dealey Plaza, and follow the leads where ever they go, but everyone has a pet suspect they want to nail and they would rather argue over inadmissible evidence rather than see what we really have if a grand jury were to ask to review it.

And rather than go into "all of the above," as suggested, it is more preferable for a detective to go in cold and see what he finds rather than cluttering his mind with stuff that's already been reviewed and has failed to produce evidence that could be reviewed by a grand jury.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I spent 20yrs with Detroit PD including two seperate tours in Homicide-having read all 26 volumes several times and a whole lot of other materials I can assure everybody the Dallas Investigation was a joke.

I've never read any dependable material that showed the relevance of drugs with Dallas. I had homicides involving drug dealers in Detroit where I talked to more people than Dallas Homicide did.

They never secured the crime scenes and never interviewed the whole DC crowd before they left town. They were either intimidated or bribed by the Feds and frankly I don't think Dallas Homicide AT THAT TIME could have found an elephant in a bath tub. Current Dallas Homicide has some really sharp folks.

Every witness to a crime has at least a few specks of gold on them and if they are approached correctly, that spek can lead to the mother load

Evan, as you know, I've tried to apply real criminal investigative techniques to what happened at Dealey Plaza, and follow the leads where ever they go, but everyone has a pet suspect they want to nail and they would rather argue over inadmissible evidence rather than see what we really have if a grand jury were to ask to review it.

And rather than go into "all of the above," as suggested, it is more preferable for a detective to go in cold and see what he finds rather than cluttering his mind with stuff that's already been reviewed and has failed to produce evidence that could be reviewed by a grand jury.


I agree with the Criminal investigation part but when it comes to writing it up you would have immediate dissent

Perhaps a more graphic display would help like a Geneology chart with the links provided by Robert Howard and Tom Scully"s Work which I see here every day, at least those of us farther behind in our understanding could make a better study if we could physically "See" the link.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I spent 20yrs with Detroit PD including two seperate tours in Homicide-having read all 26 volumes several times and a whole lot of other materials I can assure everybody the Dallas Investigation was a joke.

Welcome back Evan, haven't seen you here in a while.

It seems to me that your experience would qualify you as an expert in the field

of homicide investigation, but could you please explain to a civilian what "two separate tours" means?

How long does a tour last?

Could you also estimate how many homicide cases you investigated, and the percentage solved?

How does your percentage solved compare to the state/national average, if you have that info?

Thank you in advance for your response.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no exact length-Detroit had to be the last big city in the US to get a SWAT Team and I was asked to be the training Sgt because of weapons training I had done outside the dept and being regularly publishd in the law enforcement press. Once the Team was spun up I went back to Homicide. Had to take an early retirement due to my cooperation wih the FBI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 years later...
On 6/15/2011 at 1:48 PM, Jim Phelps said:

The Englandspiel clearly shows that circles in London were more afraid of communism, than of national socialism.

This I think i is exactly what happened in Washington DC and New York. Post WWII, it became that one had to choose: Communist or Nazi. The Dulles brothers, Rockefellers, the OSS crowd the whole thrust of the government tilted to the Nazi. Heck, McCloy actually brought over at least 50 wanted Germans because he figured who but they could fight the Commies. The world was made safe for the clients of Sullivan and Cromwell and those with accounts at Chase. Limiting the choice was arbitrary of course, but if JFK were to be forced to choose, he'd tilt the wheel toward the left, not the right I think.

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
  • Create New...