Jump to content
The Education Forum

Jim Marrs: Crossfire

Recommended Posts

Revelatory news about 9/11 is about the only way that we can stop Bush before his full 8 years are up, the problem is that there is a lot of evidence there and a lot of people have come forward yet the media just dont take it on, we need a new Watergate. I heard that patriot act 2 was in the making but was stopped, but surely they will not stop there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have anyone in mind who can be Bob Woodward's under the table speaker, you know THE DEEP SOURCE?

We need a key now? Not to mention a groupie interset in the White House given the under the table clues out into the open up over to Deep Source number 2?

Also, someone to black mail Bush? Get him all worked up.

How can anyone pull that thing off, again?

Need a hidden in the safe paper that no one knows what it is about?

Need cash to be given out that gets all mixed up with the slush fund when it was secretly given over by two of friends to the president? Doubt if anyone can do the whole scene again?

NO ONE AND NO WAY. The group is in there and already sprung over from all the rest of it's own deeds. Now they are springing loose. GET ME OUT OF HERE.

Don't think the old boys can be fooled at their own games, either.

The interesting parts is that for a while I have been saying this is "Watergate II the Backlash."

John Dean and also Gordon Liddy since Bush got into office during the first few months they said also it felt like Watergate all over again. Some of the same things all over again. Perhaps, it is underway, who knows?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Gawd. Start all over on sifting through a new omni-layered conspiracy? Maybe in 2050 we will nail these Skull-Fokkers - when we're all living in emergency "protein-provision cages". I still think the GREAT John F. Kennedy's murder is the jigger to flip the switch. It's at the foundation. It's got all the ammo at it's heart - even George Herbert Walker. Everyone wants me to move on to a NEW conspiracy - Apollo Moon Hoax - 9/11 - What's Up with Harvey Firestein? - hmmmmmm. Someone knows we're close!!!! Then, what? Sorry to hear about Carroll-Graff... did the same thing happen to Thundersmouth Press? It is the new "silencer" - take your windfall and buy up the vocal cords of everything that is causing such a pain in your ass. Ruining your bloody take-over. It is the reason Dick Cheney chose "We Want The World and We Want It Now" for his Inauguration presentation. Whatever happened to John Lennon? We sure could have used him over the last 25 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to hear about Carroll-Graff... did the same thing happen to Thundersmouth Press?  It is the new "silencer" - take your windfall and buy up the vocal cords of everything that is causing such a pain in your ass.  Ruining your bloody take-over.  It is the reason Dick Cheney chose "We Want The World and We Want It Now" for his Inauguration presentation.  Whatever happened to John Lennon?  We sure could have used him over the last 25 years.

Details of Operation Mockingbird was revealed as a result of the Frank Church investigations (Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities) in 1975. I received a copy of this report this morning. It makes interesting reading.

Here is one passage from the report that relates to publishing:

The Covert Use of Books and Publishing Houses

The Committee has found that the Central Intelligence Agency attaches a particular importance to book publishing activities as a form of covert propaganda. A former officer in the Clandestine Service stated that books are "the most important weapon of strategic (long-range) propaganda." Prior to 1967, the Central Intelligence Agency sponsored, subsidized, or produced over 1,000 books; approximately 25 percent of them in English. In 1967 alone, the CIA published or subsidized over 200 books, ranging from books on African safaris and wildlife to translations of Machiavelli's The Prince into Swahili and works of T. S. Eliot into Russian, to a competitor to Mao's little red book, which was entitled Quotations from Chairman Liu.

The Committee found that an important number of the books actually produced by the Central Intelligence Agency were reviewed and marketed in the United States:

* A book about a young student from a developing country who had studied in a communist country was described by the CIA as "developed by (two areas divisions) and, produced by the Domestic Operations Division... and has had a high impact in the United States as well as in the (foreign area) market." This book, which was produced by the European outlet of a United States publishing house was published in condensed form in two major U.S. magazines."

* Another CIA book, The Penkorsky Papers, was published in United States in 1965. The book was prepared and written by omitting agency assets who drew on actual case materials and publication rights to the manuscript were sold to the publisher through a trust fund which was established for the purpose. The publisher was unaware of any US Government interest.

In 1967, the CIA stopped publishing within the United States. Since then, the Agency has published some 250 books abroad, most of them in foreign languages. The CIA has given special attention to publication and circulation abroad of books about conditions in the Soviet Bloc. Of those targeted at audiences outside the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, a large number has also been available in English.

Domestic "Fallout"

The Committee finds that covert media operations can result in manipulating or incidentally misleading the American public. Despite efforts to minimize it, CIA employees, past and present, have conceded that there is no way to shield the American public completely from "fallout" in the United States from Agency propaganda or placements overseas. Indeed, following the Katzenbach inquiry, the Deputy Director for Operations issued a directive stating: "Fallout in the United States from a foreign publication which we support is inevitable and consequently permissible."

The domestic fallout of covert propaganda comes from many sources: books intended primarily for an English-speaking foreign audience; CIA press placements that are picked up by an international wire service; and publications resulting from direct CIA funding of foreign institutes. For example, a book written for an English-speaking foreign audience by one CIA operative was reviewed favorably by another CIA agent in the New York Times. The Committee also found that the CIA helped create and support various Vietnamese periodicals and publications. In at least one instance, a CIA supported Vietnamese publication was used to propagandize the American public and the members and staff of both houses of Congress. So effective was this propaganda that some members quoted from the publication in debating the controversial question of United States involvement in Vietnam.

The Committee found that this inevitable domestic fallout was compounded when the Agency circulated its subsidized books in the United States prior to their distribution abroad in order to induce a favorable reception overseas.

The Covert Use of 11.5. Journalists and Media Institutions on, February 11, 1976, CIA Director George Bush announced new guidelines governing the Agency's relationship with United States media organizations: "Effective immediately, CIA will not enter into any paid or contractual relationship with any full-time or part-time news correspondent accredited by any U.S. news service, newspaper, periodical, radio or television network or station."

Agency officials who testified after the February 11, 1976, announcement told the Committee that the prohibition extends to non-Americans accredited to specific United States media organizations.

The CIA currently maintains a network of several hundred foreign individuals around the world who provide intelligence for the CIA and at times attempt to influence opinion through the use of covert propaganda. These individuals provide the CIA with direct access to a large number of newspapers and periodicals, scores of press services and news agencies, radio and television stations, commercial book publishers, and other foreign media outlets.

Approximately 50 of the assets are individual American journalists or employees of US media organizations. Of these, fewer than half are "accredited" by US media organizations and thereby affected by the new prohibitions on the use of accredited newsmen. The remaining individuals are non-accredited freelance contributors and media representatives abroad, and thus are not affected by the new CIA prohibition.

More than a dozen United States news organizations and commercial publishing houses formerly provided cover for CIA agents abroad. A few of these organizations were unaware that they provided this cover.

The Committee notes that the new CIA prohibitions do not apply to "unaccredited" Americans serving in media organizations such as representatives of US media organizations abroad or freelance writers. Of the more than 50 CIA relationships with United States journalists, or employees in American media organizations, fewer than one half will be terminated under the new CIA guidelines.

The Committee is concerned that the use of American :journalists and media organizations for clandestine operations is a threat to the integrity of the press. All American journalists, whether accredited to a United States news organization or just a stringer, may be suspects when any are engaged in covert activities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest David L Sharp
I am gratified that so many people are still following the JFK assassination case. The truth is out there as we speak. But, if anyone is waiting for a formal government pronouncement of the truth, they are in for a long wait. I feel today we need to turn our investigative efforts to the 9/11 conspiracy. This is bigger than the JFK case because more than one man died and the evidence of conspiracy is emerging much faster than in the 1960s. Plus, we all know that 9/11 is the foundation of everything that has occurred since -- Patriot Act, Homeland Security, tighter government control, invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, even the 2004 elections.

Dear Mr. Marrs:

It is a pleasure to communicate with you. Please accept my apology for the delayed reply, as I just registered with the Education Forum.

I must respectfully disagree with your comment that only one man died as a result of President Kennedy's murder. Deaths of Oswald, Tippet, and scores of witnesses notwithstanding, America lost 58,000 soldiers in Vietnam, most of whom certainly would have lived had JFK also lived. Vietnam was a legacy of the Johnson administration. Another legacy of Johnson's, which I point out in my book, Opium Lords (see website link below to read online), was the Six Day War which established Israel as a major player in the world theater. It was a watershed event in the Middle East which has led to many violent reactions by Arabs and brutal reprisals by the Israelis. In my opinion, 9/11 is a direct result of the Six Day War, which was also a direct result of Kennedy's murder. Reasonable people can disagree as to whether the Six Day War was planned by the people who set up Kennedy's murder, but there is absolutely no question that it would not have occurred had Johnson not assumed power after Kennedy's violent removal by gunfire. Johnson completely roled over for Israel in a manner that Kennedy never would have done, not in a million years. Consequently, to claim that only one person died as a result of JFK's assassination is an oversimplification of modern history.


Salvador Astucia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
(1) Could you explain the reasons why you decided to become an investigative journalist and historian?

I have always been inquisitive and wanting to know the truth about everything. I received a very good grammar school education and published my first article and a cartoon in a 6th grade school paper. At the university, I was editorial page editor for the school paper and went on to write professionally for several Texas newspapers. I always sought out unusual stories and ones that I felt were important to the readers. I joined the journalism fraternity, Sigma Delta Chi, in 1965 and went through an initiation in which I pledged to seek and report truth. Since then I have always believed that was my calling.

(2) Is there any real difference between the role of an investigative journalist and a historian?

I see very little difference between a journalist and a historian other than the journalist probes current events while the historian studies the past. Both should look behind the conventional accounts presented by the victors and spin doctors and seek the truth of both history and current events.

(3) How do you decide about what to write about?

I write about what interests me with the belief that if I am interested, many other people will be also. So far, this has proved to be true.

(4) Do you ever consider the possibility that your research will get you into trouble with those who have power and influence?

I was concerned about that early on when I had to take into consideration my wife and daughters. But both girls are now grown and on their own and I don't have that much concern today. Besides, I was always taught that I live in the land of the free and home of the brave. Are you saying that's not true?

(5) You tend to write about controversial subjects. Do you think this has harmed your career in any way? Have you ever come under pressure to leave these subjects alone?

I personally have never felt threatened but I have had four books cancelled on me despite signed contracts plus several important projects suddenly dropped for insignificant or no reason. As long as a person is limited in his or her audience, the powers that be will simply ignore you. But if you are about to break into the mainstream, actions are taken. And if you really start to impact on the nation...well, just ask Dr. Martin Luther King and Bobby Kennedy what happens to you.

(6) The House Select Committee on Assassinations reported that the “committee believes, on the basis of the available evidence, that President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy”. However, very few historians have been willing to explore this area of American history. Lawrence E. Walsh’s Iran-Contra Report suggests that senior politicians were involved in and covered-up serious crimes. Yet very few historians have written about this case in any detail? Why do you think that historians and journalists appear to be so unwilling to investigate political conspiracies?

The answer to this one is quite simple. Journalists take a cue from their superiors and today the major media is owned and controlled by one of about four multinational corporations. For example, the NBC TV network is almost half owned by General Electric, a major defense contractor. The people at the top obviuously would not like honest reporting on the latest war as it might affect the profit line. This attitude trickles down to the lowest reporter, who quickly learns to stick to safe topics if they want to keep their job and retirement. Historians mostly work for universities and here too they face loss of job and are attacked by their peers if they veer too far from orthodoxy. These universities are largely subsidized by grants from the major corporations which discourages any deviation from conventional thinking that might upset these donors.

(7) What is your basic approach to writing about what I would call “secret history”? How do you decide what sources to believe? How do you manage to get hold of documents that prove that illegal behaviour has taken place?

I consider myself more of a reporter than a researcher, although often I have been forced to do some original research. First, I study everything I can lay my hands on concerning a topic, no matter what the source. Secondly, I evaluate this information and it soon becomes evident which information is well founded and which is mere speculation or theory. I then write about the topic with more weight given to the best documented evidence. But I also include the fringe evidence, usually with a caveat such as "Some researchers contend that..." I was taught, and I believe, that the reader should make up his or her own mind. It is not my place to tell anyone how to think. But no matter how brilliant a person may be, if they are operating on incomplete or erroneous information, they cannot be expected to make a correct decision on any matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

In the above interview Larry Hancock mentions Jim Marrs:

My real interest started in the early 90s when I bought Jim Marrs' book. Jim pointed out so much information that had been neglected or altered that I began to become very interested....

In his book Harvey and Lee, John Armstrong writes:

In 1990 I read
by Jim Marrs. This was the most complete work to date and presented not one, but many theories as to who could have assassinated President Kennedy. When I learned that Jim was teaching a class on the assassination at the University of Texas at Arlington, I decided to attend....

In addition to influencing the above researchers (and countless others), Crossfire became a New York Times bestseller, and was the basis for Oliver Stone's film JFK. (Which provided inspiration for an entire new generation of researchers). Marrs probably became the first (1976) to teach a university level class on the Kennedy assassination. Living in the Dallas-Fort Worth area, he helped develop countless leads in the case which today are part of history.

In the preface to Crossfire, Marrs writes:

Why seek the truth of Kennedy's death? The answer is simple. Unless we, as a nation, come to a truthful understanding of what happened to our chief elected official in 1963. we obviously cannot begin to correctly understand the events that are affecting us today.

Simple and eloquent. Jim Marrs has had an inestimable influence on all of us.

Edited by Michael Hogan
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...