Jump to content
The Education Forum

Fred J. Cook: The Truth is too Terrible


Recommended Posts

Douglas,



Interesting article. Yet I find nothing "too terrible" as described. Here are my remarks on Fred Cook's text:

  • "One of my contacts, who had been talking to a CBS news executive, told me that the executive was deeply disturbed and frustrated. His team in Dallas, he said, had uncovered leads that seemed to require further digging, but had run into the stone wall of network indifference." (Cook)
This has been going on for 52 years -- so I'm not surprised. It reflects the conservative nature of US Government; i.e. that a US President, LBJ, had approved the secrecy of the Earl Warren documents up to 75 years after 1964. That explains it.


The only way to modify that Presidential mandate is with another Presidential mandate. That's why I thank God that our former President GHW Bush signed the JFK Records Act in 1992, setting the new date of release to be Thursday 26 October 2017. Only one more year to wait! Then the US Government will automatically release them -- because it's now a Presidential mandate. Until that date, we can expect bureaucratic "indifference."

  • "Two of the best national reporters on the scene, Richard Dudman and Ronnie Dugger...were suspicious, for example, about the unbelievable speed with which the Dallas police had radioed an almost perfect description of Oswald just ten minutes after the lethal shots had been fired. Unless there was a setup, this seemed miraculous in the midst of so much turmoil and confusion." (Cook)
Yes, but this has been known for 52 years, Douglas. The good sense that rogues in the DPD were involved in a Radical Right conspiracy centered in Dallas (with arms deeper in the South) has been voiced for years. Our best current example is Dr. Jeff Caufield's new book, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy (2015).


There is no more satisfactory way to explain how the DPD allowed Jack Ruby into the DPD basement to murder Lee Harvey Oswald. This will all become clear on Thursday 26 October 2017.

  • "As for Hoover, referring to articles that had appeared in the press, I wrote that “the old authoritative leak system at which the FBI is especially adept was used. Day after day we were treated to stories that contained only a smidgeon of new information in their leads — stories that went on to point out that the FBI report, whose details nobody was permitted to know, concluded definitely and positively that Oswald was the killer; that he acted alone; that there was no conspiracy. " (Cook)
Yes, even Professor David Wrone (1995) recognized that the "Lone Nut" theory originated at 3pm CST from the desk of J. Edgar Hoover. Yet that was the same time when Hoover telephoned RFK to tell him that Lee Harvey Oswald was not a Communist and not a legitimate officer of the FPCC.


In other words, the myth coming out of Dallas that, 'a Communist had killed JFK,' was really a hoax. And actually, Hoover caught it, and countered with his own "Lone Nut" theory. This was in the interest of National Security. LBJ liked Hoover's idea, and made it into US Government Policy. It remains such until Thursday 26 October 2017.


Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren told us the truth about why he had to lie to us -- National Security. The Truth, he promised in 1964, is being preserved, to be released to the American public in 75 years. So we thought we had to wait until 2039, but then President GHW Bush signed the JFK Records Act. Now, thankfully, we only have to wait one more year.


Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul: I hope you are right and that a year from now the government will release the JFK assassination records. But I am doubtful that these will prove conclusive. The CIA and FBI will never let the truth come out or of any information that may lead to the truth coming out. What many in the JFK assassination research community do not realize it is that it is quite easy to fabricate documents and put these in the appropriate files that lead to the conclusions desired by the fabricators. Remember how Howard Hunt was ordered to fabricate false cables that indicated JFK was behind the ordering of the death of Diem in Vietnam. During the Watergate hearing he testified that he had given these to William Lambert, a prominent writer for Life magazine.

http://www.nytimes.com/1973/05/08/archives/hunt-says-colson-ordered-in-diem-death-hunt-says-colson-ordered-for.html?_r=0

Let us pay homage to Fred J. Cook. He was relentless from the very time of the assassination to prove publicly there was more to the story than the media was giving the public and that the Warren Commission report was essentially a selected crock of lies. It is easy for us 53 years later to make a solid case that there was a conspiracy in the murder of JFK but in the immediate years after his death there was almost an iron curtain to prevent the truth being told, as Cook detailed so thoroughly.

Edited by Douglas Caddy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Douglas,

One of the most vital facts in our JFK CT history is that E. Howard Hunt confessed on his deathbed that he participated in the JFK assassination plot.

It take that as a historical fact. However, Hunt also confessed that he was only on the sidelines. I take this as a fact, as well.

The upshot of the role of Hunt in framing JFK as the killer of Diem was to foment further hatred from the US Radical Right against JFK. This suggests to me that Howard Hunt was already working inside a US Civilian Conspiracy way back in 1962.

Was there any US Civilian group that was accusing JFK of being a Communist? There was -- the John Birch Society.

Now, coming from Southern California, I knew many John Birchers, and most of them were respectable and conservative American ladies and gentlemen -- perhaps most of them were professionals of some sort -- doctors, dentists and lawyers, as I recall.

Yet despite that veneer there was also passive-aggressive message inside American Opinion magazine -- namely, that all US Presidents since FDR had been Communist operatives -- including and especially JFK.

Now, most JBS folks would never act on this orientation (for example, our own Harry Dean says he believed that the JBS message in 1963 served only to push the American public from left to right, to support the Republican Party). However, there are always some radical extremists in the sidelines, and so we cannot be surprised to learn that some people took that message, "JFK is Red," as a violent mandate.

I do respect Fred Cook, just as I respect all the early CTers of the 20th century who courageously spoke out against the nonsense of the "Lone Nut" theory of the JFK assassination -- including Harold Weisberg, Sylvia Meagher, Mark Lane, Jim Garrison, and so many other luminaries.

Yet, they all tended to blame the CIA, and in my humble opinion, they were looking too far afield. I think that next year we will learn from the fulfillment of the JFK Records Act that Dr. Jeff Caufield will be vindicated -- the US Radical Right coordinated this complex assassination in Dallas.

In my reading, the FBI was obliged to push the JFK Cover-up, not in cooperation with the JFK Killers, but just as they said, and as LBJ said, and as Earl Warren said, and as Allen Dulles said -- for National Security.

I do believe there was a conspiracy to assassinate JFK, and yet I still have faith in our US Government; that they made the rational decisions for National Security after the tragedy -- and even our best JFK CT writers have often neglected this aspect.

David Lifton's superb book, Best Evidence (1980), was outstanding for his many efforts to find a benign explanation to all the evidence he found of a JFK Cover-up. I still admire that.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is a good early piece by Cook. It is significant in many ways.

First, Fred Cook was probably the leading investigative journalist for progressive magazines for three decades, the fifties, sixties, seventies, e.g. his fine book and articles on the Hiss case. Yet, even he had problems getting anything published on the JFK case.

Second, since he was so plugged in, he knew other journalists, who he mentions--Dudman and Dugger--and they also had problems not just getting something published, but in even following up leads. The NY Times commissioned a month long inquiry and then deep sixed it. In other words, the resistance to any honest reporting on the JFK case was widespread, not just in the MSM, but even on the left.

But Cook kept plugging ahead in 1964 and 1965, and he actually started reading the report. As with most intelligent people, that was it. He points out some areas of dispute that many of the early critics centered on:

Brennan's preposterous testimony

Problems with the rifle

Connally's testimony about the first shot (JBC later admitted he never believed the WR.)

Zapruder film and the timing problem

He finally writes an article and no one wants to print it. Finally, The Nation does. But with a disclaimer that its only his opinion--something they never did before.

But then they also do something that they never did before. They allowed a negative rejoinder. I love the way the author got it in--by saying that the WC never had the photos and X-rays. Which turned out to be a lie--but it was also used by McCloy on the CBS show -- a nice "blame the Kennedys" ploy. Because the Kennedys did not have possession of these exhibits in 1964, the Secret Service did.

(BTW, this guy who wrote the reply and later admitted to Salandria it was a put up job, I think that his name is Jacob Cohen. If that is him, he is still around today.)

What Griffin said was priceless--well we will never know if Oswald was an FBI informant. Uh Burt, you were supposed to find that out were you not? But with Hoover controlling the investigation? Forget it.

All in all an interesting article for its time. Cook was a good writer and researcher. And this piece gives us some real insight into how tightly the drum was sealed on the JFK case.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

James - I was trying not to derail this thread. I watched Veicana's 2013 admission that Phillips was Bishop. You asked the first question. So I thought perhaps you could answer mine - was Veciana,who was very impressive btw - ever asked if he knew David Morales, or Joannides?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, isn't it fascinating that the paragon of the Left, the Nation magazine historically has resisted exposing the JFK case?

First, Mark Lane, then Cook, then Cockburn attacked the move JFK, and then Max Holland wrote several articles for them afterwards.

What makes this even more puzzling is that the woman who runs the magazine, Vanden Heuvel is the daughter of one of RFK's advisors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, isn't it fascinating that the paragon of the Left, the Nation magazine historically has resisted exposing the JFK case?


Jim, in my opinion, I think the assassination is one of the most shameful events in this country's history and no one - not even a so-called liberal publication like Nation - wants to touch it with a 10 foot pole then or now.


We all know how Mockingbird and the CIA has infilterated the media and I think they can do just about anything they want with any media company.


As much as I think Trump is nothing but a bullying buffoon, he was raising some very ugly truths at the recent debate, one being why didn't Clinton, as a Senator, fight to get rid of the carried interest line item? Because she and her wealthy corporate donors use those same write-offs to their advantage.


So like Trump was raising some very ugly truths, 11/22 is equally ugly and is one of those truly taboo, bury-it-at-all-costs events and it's especially telling that this is the same event that one of of the most secretive agencies out there is still trying to control the message.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The explanation for the secrecy over the failed "Lone Nut" doctrine of Lee Harvey Oswald is the Presidential mandate from LBJ that this was top secret information for 75 years from the term of his Presidency.

US Government workers have lots of faith in the System. That's why they never let the facts come forward. It probably was "too terrible" for that generation to contemplate the Truth of the JFK assassination.

However, another US President, GHW Bush, signed the JFK Records Act in 1992 stating that October 2017 is the new date for the release of those secret JFK records. Everything will change this time next year.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem we have is expressed in two words, and Cook does a nice job defining it: The Media.

If we recall, when Oliver Stone's film came out, for a period of about 10 months, there was really an open debate on the issue. Our side got on national talk shows and TV specials. We were all over the radio.

The number of people saying the JFK case was a conspiracy was at about 90 per cent.

People like Jim Marrs and Richard Belzer were on night time talk shows.

Then, Robert Loomis got sick and tired of it all. He called up a guy named Jerry Posner and asked him to write a book bolstering the Warren Commission. He then got him one of the greatest PR campaigns i can remember in the book publishing world. One that literally, money could not buy for Posner, since he did not have a big name back then. This had to have been done with help from Loomis' pals in Washington-- a city he visited two days a week, as his secretary told me.

And, as they say, that was that. Ever since that paradigm was set, there has been almost no let up by the MSM about how great the WCR was and how daffy the critics are e.g. Rather at the 30th, Jennings at the fortieth and Brokaw at the fiftieth--all assisted in their dirty work by Gus Russo. Our only representative in this 23 year death grip has been, unfortunately, Nigel Turner. Which, given that alternative, I would rather have no one advocating for us rather than have Turner.

The ARRB was dreadfully ignored by the press. There were really only a handful of articles about it. Plus, all of the principals vocally expressed the idea that nothing they unearthed overturned the WCR. Which is absolute bunk.

Cyril Wecht's conferences are very good, but they only get regional coverage for the most part. And when they send a national correspondent there, its to do a hatchet job, like Time did on the 50th.

As Fred Cook shows, this process began almost immediately. ( Click here for more proof https://consortiumnews.com/2016/04/22/how-cbs-news-aided-the-jfk-cover-up/)

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The trouble with Oliver Stone's 1992 movie, JFK, is that it was based on Jim Garrison's 1988 book, On the Trail of the Assassins.

The trouble with Jim Garrison's work -- although he was brilliant -- is that he gave up on trying to track the Radical Right in Dallas, and just went for his own backyard in New Orleans -- and then he confused the Kill-Fidel movement for the Kill-JFK movement, and the lines got blurred. (That's the real reason Garrison couldn't get a conviction.)

So then Jim Garrison fell into the CIA-did-it CT rabbit hole. He was joined there by Mark Lane, Harold Weisberg, Jim Marrs, Robert Groden, even giants like A.J. Weberman, and actually the majority of 20th century CT writers.

Everything changes when we consider Jeff Caufield's Walker-did-it theory. Caufield used the full, collected papers of Jim Garrison in his book, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy (2015). Caufield says that Jim Garrison originally pursued the Radical Right CT, but he ran into too much resistance in the late 1960's -- too much heat.

It's easier to blame the CIA, because you can always say that they burned the evidence, so you never have to produce any.

But Edwin Lopez finally produced some CIA evidence with his Lopez-Hardway Report (2003) And Bill Simpich soared above everybody else in CIA research with his ground-breaking, free eBook, State Secret: Wiretapping in Mexico City (2014).

Whoever hasn't read those three books is still stuck in the 20th century.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
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...