I Have Always Considered Dorothy Kilgallen's Murder A Much More Important Reveal Of The JFK Truth Than We Have Ever Contemplated.

[Joe Bauer]

On 1/30/2022 at 9:11 AM, James DiEugenio said:

Here is Sara Jordan's original article in  Midwest Today.

https://www.midtod.com/dorothy.html

Everything of value in his last three books stems from this long essay.

Yes, almost all of Shaw's book "The Reporter Who Knew Too Much" is drawn from the article. Give credit where credit is due.

I still give Shaw credit for keeping this important story alive on a much broader national scale than the article ever would, could or did.

I don't know much about Lee Isreal's book on Kilgallen. 

 

[Joe Bauer]

I know it's been 57 years but I wish I was a good screenwriter.

I still think a major A-list film on Dorothy Kilgallen's life would make for a fascinating and relevant film.

Such a film could also bring the JFK assassination back into our societal consciousness in important reflective and thought provoking ways imo.

Edited August 30, 2022 by Joe Bauer

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Michael Griffith said:

Humm, well, I think the weight of the evidence is solidly against any positive portrayal of Joe Kennedy. Mark Shaw, using numerous credible sources, presents a fair amount of evidence in Collateral Damage on Joe Kennedy's seedier dealings, especially regarding his deal with the Mafia to get JFK elected in 1960. I hesitate to recommend Ronald Kessler's book on Joe Sr., although it contains much factual material, but I do recommend Ted Schwarz's book Joseph P. Kennedy: The Mogul, the Mob, the Statesman, and the Making of an American Myth.

All this being said, I would contend that Joe Kennedy was less immoral than Curtis LeMay or Alan Dulles.

A couple of the chief smears on Joe Snr are that he was a bootlegger, a rumour started by a Mafia associate about 6 years after Joe’s death. It happened to be that there were Kennedy’s that were bootlegging in New York, completely unrelated. It is after all the 25th most common surname in the world, or there about’s. Somerset Importers just made for a great narrative. 
 

Another which Wiki likes is that he was an anti-Semite. He certainly used the phrases of his day to describe people of various ethnic and cultural groups, something the Irish themselves were stigmatised by. The reality was that it was Joe as US Ambassador in the UK who was trying to get the Jews out of Germany and France, asking Roosevelt to take them as part of the UK migrant quota. Joe and Chamberlain both asked. Roosevelt said “it’s not our problem.” Both Joe and Chamberlain could see a disaster about to happen. 
 

Regarding the Kennedy’s in general, the victors in the assassination have written their history, diminishing any accomplishments or virtues they had. Why? People stop caring about the dead if they seem them as immoral. 
 

To better understand all of this, it needs looking at from the lens at the time, taking into account what was happening in politics. Its a dirty business. Those who have read what JFK/RFK were trying to do understand that it was a better direction for America and its people. The father has no small part in that, he was the most influential figure in their lives. The mother was committed to god and god only. 

[Michael Griffith]

5 minutes ago, Chris Barnard said:

A couple of the chief smears on Joe Snr are that he was a bootlegger, a rumour started by a Mafia associate about 6 years after Joe’s death. It happened to be that there were Kennedy’s that were bootlegging in New York, completely unrelated. It is after all the 25th most common surname in the world, or there about’s. Somerset Importers just made for a great narrative. 
 

Another which Wiki likes is that he was an anti-Semite. He certainly used the phrases of his day to describe people of various ethnic and cultural groups, something the Irish themselves were stigmatised by. The reality was that it was Joe as US Ambassador in the UK who was trying to get the Jews out of Germany and France, asking Roosevelt to take them as part of the UK migrant quota. Joe and Chamberlain both asked. Roosevelt said “it’s not our problem.” Both Joe and Chamberlain could see a disaster about to happen. 
 

Regarding the Kennedy’s in general, the victors in the assassination have written their history, diminishing any accomplishments or virtues they had. Why? People stop caring about the dead if they seem them as immoral. 
 

To better understand all of this, it needs looking at from the lens at the time, taking into account what was happening in politics. Its a dirty business. Those who have read what JFK/RFK were trying to do understand that it was a better direction for America and its people. The father has no small part in that, he was the most influential figure in their lives. The mother was committed to god and god only. 

I do agree that Joe Sr. did some good things and was not entirely bad. I tried to convey this with my comment that he was not as immoral as Dulles or LeMay. 

You touched on an important point about FDR's apathy about the fate of the Jews and his refusal to help them escape the Holocaust. Over the last 20 years, several thorough--and disturbing--books have been written about FDR's miserable record on the Jews and the Holocaust. The few small steps that he took to help European Jews he took reluctantly and after being pressured to do so. Two of the better books on the subject are Rafael Medoff's The Jews Should Keep Quiet and David Wyman's devastating The Abandonment of the Jews: America and the Holocaust 1941-1945.

[Guest]

41 minutes ago, Michael Griffith said:

I do agree that Joe Sr. did some good things and was not entirely bad. I tried to convey this with my comment that he was not as immoral as Dulles or LeMay. 

I understand, I just think that Joe’s infractions or business practices, or buying of votes do not belong in the same sentence as a covert mass murderer and an overt mass murderer. If Le May had his own way he’d certainly be taking a place alongside your Stalin’s, Mussolini’s and Hitler’s in terms of the horrors he was capable of. 

Edited August 30, 2022 by Chris Barnard

[Paul Brancato]

3 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

I understand, I just think that Joe’s infractions or business practices, or buying of votes do not belong in the same sentence as a covert mass murderer and an overt mass murderer. If Le May had his own way he’d certainly be taking a place alongside your Stalin’s, Mussolini’s and Hitler’s in terms of the horrors he was capable of. 

Thanks for chiming in Chris. Joe Sr enlisting the mafia in 1960 to help his son seems to be the main smear, since others have been a rewriting of history. I’d agree with RFK Jr, and the Kennedy family archives on this one. The evidence is slim, and really makes little sense. Why would the Mafia want RFK’s brother in the WH? It surely backfired, and the evidence was clear enough going in that the Brothers were no friends of the Mafia, unlike Nixon. So mob bosses can say what they want, but I’ll take RFK Jr’s word on this and other smears. 

[Michael Griffith]

58 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

Thanks for chiming in Chris. Joe Sr enlisting the mafia in 1960 to help his son seems to be the main smear. . . .

It's not a smear. You could start by considering the evidence that Shaw presents on this issue in Collateral Damage. Shaw's case on this issue is one of the strongest parts of his book.

On a related note, Anthony Summers notes that "a mass of persuasive information links their names [the Kennedys] to election tampering" (Not in Your Lifetime, p. 9).

Edited August 30, 2022 by Michael Griffith

[Paul Brancato]

4 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

It's not a smear. You could start by considering the evidence that Shaw presents on this issue in Collateral Damage. Shaw's case on this issue is one of the strongest parts of his book.

On a related note, Anthony Summers notes that "a mass of persuasive information links their names [the Kennedys] to election tampering" (Not in Your Lifetime, p. 9).

It comes down to who one finds credible. Posner is convincing too. 

[Guest]

7 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Thanks for chiming in Chris. Joe Sr enlisting the mafia in 1960 to help his son seems to be the main smear, since others have been a rewriting of history. I’d agree with RFK Jr, and the Kennedy family archives on this one. The evidence is slim, and really makes little sense. Why would the Mafia want RFK’s brother in the WH? It surely backfired, and the evidence was clear enough going in that the Brothers were no friends of the Mafia, unlike Nixon. So mob bosses can say what they want, but I’ll take RFK Jr’s word on this and other smears. 

TBH Paul, I am in no position to prove or disprove whether JFK or Nixon bought votes or cut corners in 1961. What I do know is the rewriting of history isn’t kind to JPK or JFK, its highly corrupt and lacking in honesty. Mostly all JPK is guilty of is being a pacifist and thinking Hitler could be negotiated with. The older I get, the more I sympathise or agree with people who offer solutions other than violence. 
 

PS RFK Jr is one of the most maligned individuals today, I’d trust him over anything on MSM. I have American Values in my collection too. 

Edited August 31, 2022 by Chris Barnard

[Ron Bulman]

1 hour ago, Chris Barnard said:

TBH Paul, I am in no position to prove or disprove whether JFK or Nixon bought votes or cut corners in 1961. What I do know is the rewriting of history isn’t kind to JPK or JFK, its highly corrupt and lacking in honesty. Mostly all JPK is guilty of is being a pacifist and thinking Hitler could be negotiated with. The older I get, the more I sympathise or agree with people who offer solutions other than violence. 
 

PS RFK Jr is one of the most maligned individuals today, I’d trust him over anything on MSM. I have American Values in my collection too. 

Well said, both of you.

[Pamela Brown]

This is a good book on Papa Joe and his time at the Court of St. James...

https://www.amazon.com/Ambassador-Joseph-Kennedy-Jamess-1938-1940/dp/1250238722

[Michael Griffith]

15 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

It comes down to who one finds credible. Posner is convincing too. 

Shaw quotes several Kennedy friends/biographers on this point. Seymour Hersh deals with this issue at some length in The Dark Side of Camelot (see the chapter titled "The Stolen Election").

Posner??? Posner is one of the last researchers I would trust on anything involving JFK. Does he deal with all the sources that Shaw quotes?

Let me add that I am not insisting that the Mafia stole the 1960 election for Kennedy. I am focusing on the deal that Joseph Sr. made with the Mafia to help get JFK elected. Whether or not Mafia assistance played a key role in JFK's victory is another issue.

Edited August 31, 2022 by Michael Griffith