Jump to content
The Education Forum

Classic John Judge at his very best 1/22/1992 (JFK the movie)


Recommended Posts

A classic from the greatly missed John Judge (The Searchers, COPA, etc.). This program ("JFK: Cinema as History"; about the JFK movie) aired on C-SPAN back on 1/26/1992 but was video-taped 1/22/1992, exactly 30 years ago tomorrow. John is at his eloquent best here (although he was always amazing). The program was good but he was, by far, the very best. Enjoy! [Note: I had an average-quality bootleg of this on my channel here since 6/17/2008 and it garnered 13, 804 views, hundreds of likes and many positive comments before I decided to delete it for this far superior-in-quality version] Classic John Judge at his very best 1/22/1992 (JFK the movie) #jfkassassination #oliverstone #jfk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait. About ten minutes in, Judge says he found the Nixon letter about Ruby in the files. My understanding is that this letter was found by someone else, and that no one else has been able to replicate this "find." 

Is the Nixon letter about Rubenstein authentic, and, if so, is the Rubenstein mentioned in the letter, in fact, Ruby? 

Does anyone know? I know Roger Stone cites the letter in his book, but he's not exactly credible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Speaking for myself I am reminded of my years ago pledge to remember and review from time to time this amazing video of John Judge and Fletcher Prouty speaking at this American University "JFK" film debate conference.

Still, I had forgotten about it until one hour ago after finding you had recently reposted it here.

The man ( Judge ) was incredibly well researched and informed and combined with his righteous indignation and even angry and little antagonistic but still well spoken speaking style was a formidable debate presence imo. Compelling to watch and to listen to.

Mort Sahl had some of that same passionate righteous indignation style of JFK truth seeking sharing ( albeit mixed with biting, ironic and occasional cynical humor ) and even sometimes called out his audience and the American people for their complacency in not wanting to know or care more about the JFK truth.

Judge's recounting of his mother's high Pentagon position and her job of making mathematical predictive models for future Viet Nam War related human losses and draft numbers for the military high command was shocking secret truth revealing in their early existence and uncanny accuracy.

Fletcher Prouty had the most impact on the audience. He had a gravitas that set him apart. And he had a background in the military that was at the highest levels and long term - 9 years head of special ops and answering directly to the Chiefs Of Staff and even White House visits. Knew Alan Dulles personally.

Yet, even Judge and Prouty made some ( a few ) mistakes in their presentations from what I recall of the entire video. Of course, these were jumped on desperately by their adversaries who knew they were losing the debate judging by the applause reactions of the majority of the audience.

A few reflection points in my mind.

I think everybody now knows George Bush senior was involved with the CIA even years before 1963. Why the denials, even today 60 years later?

I really liked Judge's analogy of the Mob being "shoe shine boys" to the real power groups in our highest levels of government. 

They were used ... when needed.

But does anyone really believe that the highest dons of the American mob in the 50's and 60's ( Marcello, Giancana, Trafficante, etal.,) had the think tank brains of the other much higher up power groups alluded to by Prouty and Judge? 

Able to plan, carry out and coverup something as big as the JFK, MLK and RFK's murders and controlling investigations and the media? And get away with it?

These organized crime guys barely made it past junior high school in the education department.

Vince, do you have the link to the entire debate we see Judge in here? Could you repost this for me and others to view it again? It's was a very inspiring debate event imo.

 

 

 

Edited by Joe Bauer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always heard that Jack Ruby was the fourth guy in this picture with Prescott Bush, Averill Herriman, and Richard Nixon and that it was taken in 1947. Correct me if I'm wrong gentleman. That's just what I have read. I know I have also read that Jacob Rubenstein AKA Jack Ruby was recommended to Richard Nixon as an informant by Prescott Bush.

9zln0ROdlsrSxddFM__u6ef0YDgrVWi1KOBdGrersb4.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

Speaking for myself I am reminded of my years ago pledge that seeing this video of John Judge speaking at this conference should be absolutely required viewing and reviewing by me from time to time.

I had forgotten about Judge and this video until finding it reposted here recently an hour ago.

The man ( Judge ) was incredibly well researched and informed and combined with his righteous and even angry and antagonistic but well spoken indignation speaking style was a formidable debate presence. Compelling to watch and to listen to imo.

Mort Sahl had some of that same passionate righteous indignation style of JFK truth seeking sharing ( albeit mixed with biting, ironic and occasional cynical humor ) and even sometimes called out his audience and the American people for their complacency in not wanting to know or care more about the JFK truth.

Judge's recounting of his mother's high Pentagon position and her job of making mathematical predictive models for future Viet Nam War related human losses and draft numbers for the military high command was disturbing secret truth revealing in their early existence and uncanny accuracy.

Judge really shook up his debate adversaries on that panel as I recall. They were out research gunned and resorted to kind of a personal anger offended tone and tact in trying to refute his presentation points which they just never really did and to make Judge look like more of an angry paranoid conspiracy nut character more than a than a very well informed and logical presenter.

I think Fletcher Prouty was super impressed by Judge. Judge reaffirmed much of Prouty's claims.

Yet, even Judge and Prouty made some ( a few ) mistakes in their presentations from what I recall of the entire video. Of course, these were jumped on desperately by their adversaries who knew they were losing the debate judging by the applause reactions of the majority of the audience.

A few reflection points in my mind.

I think everybody now knows George Bush senior was involved with the CIA even years before 1963. Why the denials, even today 60 years later?

I really liked Judge's analogy of the Mob being "shoe shine boys" to the real power groups in our highest levels of government. 

They were used ... when needed.

But does anyone really believe that the highest dons of the American mob in the 50's and 60's had the think tank brains of these other groups? 

Marcello, Giancana, Trafficanti, Luciano, Gambino, Lansky ... able to plan, carry out and coverup something as big as the JFK, MLK and RFK's murders? And get away with it? These guys barely made it past junior high school in the education department.

Vince, do you have the link to the entire debate we see Judge in here? Could you repost this for me and others to view it again? It's was a very inspiring debate event imo.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting two hours CSPAN American Uni video.  Thanks for posting.  (Recorded on my 39th birthday.) 🥳

16 hours ago, Vince Palamara said:

The man ( Judge ) was incredibly well researched and informed and combined with his righteous and even angry and antagonistic but well spoken indignation speaking style was a formidable debate presence. Compelling to watch and to listen to imo.

Think above quote from Joe which I agree with.  However, Judge did not challenge Dan Moldea's charge of Garrison "being on Marcello's payroll" and "being caught by IRS with marked money". No mention of CIA's support for Shaw's trial defence or the infiltration of Garrison's office by its Confidential Correspondents Group in New Orleans, or the likes of Bill Gurvich and others.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've posted the broader conference.

His mother was told in 1963 that they are now going to war in Vietnam, that it will last 10 years, and it would end in 57,000 deaths! Too omnipotent , too prophetic, too much a low hanging fruit for the conspiracy hungry. Sorry I don't buy it.

Of the 3 major points as to Bush's  early ties to the agency, he confused the details of the FBi Hoover memo with Bush's Parrot accusation. But I suppose that could happen to anybody. 

 

Yo Mama!

Edited by Kirk Gallaway
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...