Jump to content
The Education Forum


Jon G. Tidd

Recommended Posts

I'm inclined to say yes for one reason: in the wake of JFK's murder Americans lost faith in the U.S. Government.

But if I examine that argument, I'm forced to admit that it wasn't JFK's murder that caused loss of faith. It was the way the U.S. Government and its officers dealt with the murder. The Government denied the truth to the American people.

I came some years ago to believe [a] all elected officials are incompetent and dishonest, and all government bureaucrats are the same, only worse. But I see today that elected officials and government bureaucrats haven't changed since 1963. Hoover has been replaced by some non-entity. Katzenbach has been replaced by some non-entity. McCone, the same. Today's players are faceless and nameless, so to speak. They're less colorful than the players in 1963, but they play by the same rules.

JFK's murder caused some ripples in time and space. No ripple really dies, in the sense that there's conservation of energy, a deep principle of the universe. But today, what lives on is not JFK's murder -- even though I believe it gave rise to the Viet Nam war and the 1960s as represented by popular culture. What lives on today, in panoramic color for all to see, is the cover-up.

Sandy Larsen, I believe, and Sandy please forgive me if I'm wrong, or someone else, has written that to understand the cover-up one must understand the crime. I don't think that's necessary. I think today, 6 February 2016, the cover-up had its genesis in the crime but acquired a life of its own very quickly. And I think it's the cover-up that fuels the debates over the assassination.

When one is in the trenches, one can't see the big picture, only the features of the battlefield immediately ahead.

I've studied the features of the battlefield a bit. Not as much as the experts here. I don't think one can understand the battlefield without taking a wide, overhead view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Also the debt we have as individuals and as a country. Kennedy was going to do away with the Federal Reserve. He was a popular man with the people, but he had so many enemies in power (e.g., the oil barons, big business). Would we have credit card debt to deal with? I think we would have much richer citizens. And no Viet Nam War which took so many lives.

Kathy C

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is my first post here, I've only been a member a couple of months.

I wouldn't call myself a JFK researcher but I've read quite a few books in the last couple years. My goal in life is to be a fiction writer.

James Douglass's book first got me interested.

I think the primary reason that I'm interested now is the idea that things could have been different. The idea people do have agency. Margaret Thatchers' "There is no alternative" comes to mind. There's a view of history that it's like a tidal wave, that there's nothing we can do, that what is now was inevitable and that no other decisions or realities were viable. The Vietnam war had to happen, neo-liberalism had to happen, etc. The idea that people can have agency. I think it's Talbot's book and discussion here that things could have been different if Kennedy lived, maybe even dramatically different. It's speculation, I know, maybe he would have kept us out of Vietnam and 58,000 Americans would never had died. Maybe the cold war would have ended much sooner. Maybe we wouldn't have caused so much trouble and destruction in the Middle East. Maybe neo-liberalism would never have become ascendant with the overthrow of Allende in Chile and the election of Reagan. Maybe we all wouldn't be so mired in private debt. The idea that things could have been different and that people have agency and can imagine different ways of doing things.

I do a lot of reading of other reading, so I think the JFK assassination/administration still is very relevant today.

Some things I find particularly interesting:

1. Economics - I read the blog Naked Capitalism everyday, it deals with Modern Monetary Theory/Economics/politics/etc. So the stuff about the Fed and monetary stuff interests me.

2. Economics/Third World/economic stratification - John Perkins and his Confessions of an Economic Hitman. The Rise of Neoliberalism and the extreme income stratification of society. I love David Graeber's book Debt.

3. The Drug War -

4. We used to assassinate foreign leaders now we assassinate and destroy entire countries.

5. I read a lot of Philip K. Dick so I love all the shifting realities, the creation of perception, the manipulation of the public opinion, counter-intelligence.

6. I've also read a lot of Rene Girard, so the idea of so many different groups had a possible hand in it, the CIA, military-industrial complex, the mob, the bankers, the white supremacists and then even the Mossad all gathering around the victim to start a new order or to set the newly arising order into stone.

Sorry for the rambling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I neglected to mention the effect of the cover-up on the mainstream press.

The mainstream press swallowed whole the Oswald-did-it-alone story.

By the late 1960s, CBS was a major public supporter of the Warren report, even though by the late 1960s a clear majority of the U.S. public came to doubt the report's conclusion that there was no conspiracy. This was while a clear majority of the U.S. public supported the war; and in my estimation would have supported Operation Mockingbird.

The press shot itself in the foot over the Warren Report.

When "All the President's Men" came out in the mid-1970s, it caused lots of youngsters to want to become Woodward & Bernstein. That movie was great for journalism schools. It took Jim Hougan's "Secret Agenda" to dispel the holy myth of Robert Woodward and the Washington Post.

Today, name ten persons who believe in the truthfulness of the mainstream media, and if you can, award yourself a treat; maybe a piece of cheesecake, because you will have named the last ten individuals in the U.S. whose thinking resembles that of Americans circa November 1, 1963.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

all you have to do is look around; it should make you sick and folks it ain't coming back anytime soon. the best you can do is to be citizens of the government in exile and be like the mole in the song made famous by bas com lunsford: "I wish I was a mole in the ground /If I’s a mole in the ground I’d root that mountain down /And I wish I was a mole in the ground. good luck

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I remember the good old days, having been born in late 1945.

In retrospect, the food, music, and public education were far superior. None of those are coming back in an across-the-board way.

U.S. politics haven't changed, in my view. It's all self-serving.

Unlike some, I'm optimistic about the U.S. Its charter, the Constitution, is largely un-flawed. Largely. Voters still get to vote. Still get to make history.

For me personally, having grown up in Illinois, JFK's death hasn't had a big impact except psychologically. The biggest impact for me was the Illinois law in the mid-1950s that outlawed firecrackers and other July 4th fireworks. I've always been an assume-the-risk person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think in many ways the assassination is more important than ever.

The same conglomerate that killed JFK has evolved into an even more finely tuned threat to a government of the people, by the people and for the people, than it was in 1963.

The good news is that we the people still can change things, with the power of the vote. The dark side cannot accomplish the goals it has if we are smart enough to elect folks who are not part of the machine.

I may not live to see the truth be known about 11/22/63, but the truth will be known I am sure. That's why I have taught my three children about this case so that they will be able to carry on the fight, not only in finding the truth in the assassination, but also to stand guard against their government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JFK conceivably could have died on 11-22-63 for many different reasons. Such as an accident, a heart attack or stroke, a gunshot fired by LHO provably acting alone. In any one of these events, LBJ would have become president, and the 1960s would have unfolded pretty much the same.

The reason JFK's death is important today, IMO, is that the cover-up as to the exact nature of his wounds has fueled suspicion of the U.S. Government that will not abate.

As was said during the Watergate affair, the cover-up is worse than the crime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By "matter today" I mean "have consequences playing out today".

The assassination clearly has consequences playing out today for those who debate aspects of the assassination.

For me, the only part of the assassination that matters to me today is the cover-up. For me, if the mafia did it, so what? For me, if the Cubans did it, so what? For me, even if the CIA did it, so what? I don't really care who did it. I want the full and complete truth as to why our government and its many employees have fought so hard over the years to keep the American people from knowing the truth of the assassination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want the full and complete truth as to why our government and its many employees have fought so hard over the years to keep the American people from knowing the truth of the assassination.

A tweak of what you've demanded here advances it to a very uncommon, somewhat meddlesome request:
I want the full and complete truth as to why our government, the media, academia, and the JFK research community have fought so hard over the years to keep the American people from knowing the truth of the assassination.
Edited by Ken Rheberg
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...