Monday 20th of May 2024

Uncle George... and the JFK conspiracies...


The assassination of President John Kennedy was the result of a major conspiracy. The information about it has been side-tracked, confused and masterly hidden. 


More than 40,000 pages of “information”, transcript of interviews and court cases have recently been released. Some of these have been redacted — that is to say that critical information has been removed from public view. There are still many pages to be released but these are not on the public record. Why not? 


To tell it simply, somewhere in all these pages, there is strong evidence of a conspiracy, which would run contrary to the official narrative that Oswald — the loony designated murderer — acted alone. He did not. Behind his action, if he was culpable and not just a fall guy for “being there with a gun”, there was a whole world of intrigue and double-crosses, with counter-crosses and many crisscrosses. 


The beginning of the 1960s was eventful for the USA with the Cuban revolution, the “Cold War” with the USSR — and some countries being reluctantly shaped to the will of the USA, like Indonesia, The Philippines and Japan.


Meanwhile it appears that — possibly in order to avoid WW3 — President Kennedy, after his altercation with the USSR in regard to the “Cuban missile stand-off, was about to make peace with the said country. By then the agreement with Krutchev, was that the USA would remove their nukes from Europe and the USSR would remove its rockets from Cuba — and the world would be better for it. It has to be said that the USSR had placed nuclear missiles in Cuba AFTER the USA had installed nukes in Europe. 


As well, after the disastrous Bay of Pig failure, Kennedy might have been prepared to make a reasonable deal with Castro. Meanwhile Europe, through Adenauer and especially General de Gaulle was a bit recalcitrant in regard to the US hegemony. Europe was preparing to become united under its own steam. De Gaulle was fighting his own terrorists, some of them could have been inspired by the CIA…


Despite his popularity, Kennedy would have annoyed the budding neocons in the USA, because of all this. He would have annoyed the Cuban refugees — some very high in the previous Cuban government. The USA were gaining peace, but in this process, the USA were losing influence.


In his 2018 State of the Union speech, Donald Trump repeatedly referenced a specific gang, MS-13, by name. These mentions were intended to justify his administration’s anti-immigration policies. Though MS-13 originated among Salvadoran immigrant communities in L.A., most of its members are now concentrated in Central America, particularly El Salvador. The group is relatively small: Of the 1.4 million gang members the FBI estimates are in the U.S., less than one per cent of them belong to MS-13.


To most Americans, it makes sense that the federal government targets large organizations that commits crimes nationally. But before Robert F. Kennedy’s term as Attorney General from 1961 to 1963, the federal government — as well as most Americans — didn’t seem to understand the concept of “organized crime.” 


When Robert Kennedy arrived at the Department of Justice, its organized crime and racketeering section “was just two or three lawyers reading files,” says Ronald Goldfarb, a lawyer who worked in the section under Kennedy and wrote a book about the subject titled Perfect Villains, Imperfect Heroes. “[Kennedy] enlivened it so that it quickly grew to about 60 lawyers, and it was the department’s priority.”


Under Kennedy, one of the DOJ’s main focuses became the Mafia, which by the mid-20th century had an estimated 5,000 members and thousands more associates across the country. Previously, individual gang members had been investigated for crimes, but this was the first time the government had attempted to take this organized criminal organization on the whole.


The department also investigated crooked unions, gambling rings, and other organizations that broke laws in many parts of the country. In 1961, Kennedy sent Goldfarb and others to Newport, Kentucky, with instructions to look into a lurid case. When a man named George Ratterman ran for sheriff of Newport’s county of Campbell on a platform of tackling the city’s rampant crime, his opponents drugged him and planted him in bed with a stripper named April Flowers to discredit him. 


Known as “Sin City”, Newport was then a hub for prostitution and the center of a national gambling ring, where a betting syndicate handled “over the wires, extraordinary sums of money bet around the country,” Goldfarb writes in his book. In the end, Ratterman won the sheriff’s seat and crime began to go down.



Kennedy also had to push past the resistance from FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, who at the time spoke and behaved as if he didn’t believe the Mafia existed. “It’s not clear” if Hoover really believed that; but in any case, Goldfarb says Hoover had “other reasons” for avoiding organized crime.


When Franklin Roosevelt became president in 1933, Hoover worked hard to develop a close working relationship with the president. Roosevelt helped promote Hoover’s crime control program and expand FBI authority. Hoover grew the FBI from a small, relatively limited agency into a large and influential one. He then provided the president with information on his critics, and even some foreign intelligence, all while ingratiating himself with FDR to retain his job.


President Harry Truman didn’t like Hoover much, and thought Hoover’s FBI was a potential “citizen spy system.” 


Hoover thought President Dwight Eisenhower was an ideological ally with an interest in expanding FBI surveillance. This led to increased FBI use of illegal microphones and wiretaps. 


The president looked the other way as the FBI carried out some questionable investigations.



Thus, apart from being “agents for peace”, both Kennedys, John and Robert, would have pissed off the Mafia, as well. 


As well, Kennedy’s brother, Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy ordered an army general, Ted Walker, committed to a mental asylum for a 90-day evaluation in response to his role in the Ole Miss riot of 1962, where Walker showed his full-on racist side. Walker’s psychiatrist, Thomas Szasz, protested and Walker was released within five days. Attorney Robert Morris convinced a Mississippi grand jury not to indict Walker.


On April 10, 1963, Walker became the target of an assassination attempt in his home, but escaped serious injury when a bullet fired from outside hit a window frame and fragmented. After the investigation into the assassination of John F. Kennedy, the Warren Commission concluded that Walker's shooter had been Lee Harvey Oswald.


There are some troubling extra information about the Walker assassination attempt. This is where we meet Uncle George. No, this is not about George W H Bush (yet), but about one of his acquaintances. George de Mohrenschildt (Jerzy Sergius von Mohrenschildt), a Russian-born petroleum engineer whose story as so far detailed in the long-kept secret JFK assassination files and recently released, reads like a spy novel. That's one reason why de Mohrenschildt, who died in 1977, has been a staple of Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories for almost 54 years.


George W H Bush knew de Mohrenschildt. De Mohrenschildt was “a mate of a mate” that Bush met a few times. De Mohrenschildt knew Oswald. Jacqueline Kennedy, as a young Jacqueline Bouvier, knew de Mohrenschildt. It was her who referred to de Mohrenschildt as “Uncle George”, as when a little girl, she often sat on his knees. 


At one stage, when de Mohrenschildt (check?) visited Oswald at his home, he saw Oswald’s gun and asked Oswald if this was the gun he had used to try to shoot General Walker with…


Thus, did Oswald really try to shoot Walker and did someone knew about this BEFORE the assassination of John Kennedy?...  


As well, as the CIA was being composted from the restructuring of the OSS, many CIA operations were designed to infiltrate many religious organisations such as the Quakers and other “peaceful organisations” to check out and influence on their connections with the USSR and prevent them from spreading the message of “peace”. 


The CIA, of which George W H Bush was an active spy for since he was 18 years old, would have been pissed off by the Kennedy brothers, for trying to “make peace” as well.



Oswald was on the radar of the CIA and the FBI for having gone to Russia and for having married a Russian woman, with whom he had a kid. At this stage it is highly possible that Oswald had an FBI or CIA controller. As his movements were closely monitored, how did he “manage to shoot JFK”...  The lynch-pin amongst all this crap was de Mohrenschildt who was of mixed Polish, Russian, Ukrainian backgrounds but was also considered by the CIA to be a Nazi agent, still after the end of WW2. 


Ukraine had for a while been a supporter of Nazi Germany, until the Red Army came through Ukraine, “liberating” Ukraine — but as we have seen recently, there are still many Nazis in Ukraine — a situation that did not escape the Obama administration.



So, to recap, John Kennedy had made some powerful enemies:


—  The Mafia


—  The anti-communist Russians


—  The Cuban refugees


—  The CIA


—  The army brass protective of general Walker.


—  The Nazis


—  J. Edgar Hoover (fiercely Republican) FBI Director from 1924 to 1972 (48 years!).


—  Crooked unions


— gambling rings


—  The Neocons.


Who could make the links between all these and “help them” eliminate John Kennedy?



First, though Oswald was officially DEEMED to be the shooter in General Walker’s attempted assassination — only AFTER THE ASSASSINATION OF JFK, we do not have his motives for his try to eliminate General Walker. Oswald had to have been coached by someone in order to do the deed. Otherwise, why would Oswald try to kill Walker out of his own bat? The assassination of John Kennedy could strongly hinge on this conjecture. 


Meanwhile, George W H Bush was cutting his teeth at the CIA, under the watchful eye of the then boss:



Bureau of Intelligence and Research
Department of State

[We have been] advised that the Department of State feels some misguided anti-Castro group might capitalize on the present situation and undertake an unauthorized raid against Cuba, believing that the assassination of President John F. Kennedy might herald a change in U.S. policy… [Our] sources know of no [such] plans…  The substance of the foregoing information was orally furnished to Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency and Captain William Edwards of the Defense Intelligence Agency.


 Remember that Uncle George (Jerzy Sergius von Mohrenschildt) was into petroleum and that George W H Bush made his fortune in petroleum as well — an industry where George W H Bush recruited many CIA agents....



Gus Leonisky


More to come


See also: 

an oldie but a goodie...



George Michael Evica was born in Cleveland, Ohio, on 8th December, 1927. He studied at the Case Western Reserve University (1945-49) and Columbia University (1951-55).

He taught at the Rutgers University (1956-57), Columbia University (1957), Wagner College (1957-59), Brooklyn College (1957-1960), San Francisco State (1960-1964) and the University of Hartford (1964-1992).

Subjects taught included Myth and Ritual in Literature, Genre Studies in Literature, Literary Criticism, Consciousness Development and the Symbolic Process, Linguistics, Film Studies, Creative Writing, Investigative Reporting, and Investigative History. He also published papers on John F. KennedyFidel Castro and Jimmy Hoffa. He also studied Advanced Studies in Linguistics and Anthropology at Columbia University (1957-1960) and Advanced Studies in Myth and Literature at Hartford Seminary Foundation (1971-73).

In 1977 George Michael Evica provided evidence to the House Select Committee on Assassinations. He also wrote extensively about the assassination of John F. Kennedy. This included, And We Are All Mortal: New Evidence And Analysis In The Assassination Of John F. Kennedy (1978). It was described by Mary Ferrell as the "best documented" of the books on the assassination.

Evica organized the First National Conference on the JFK Assassination in October, 1975, at the University of Hartford and was director of the Connecticut Citizens Commission of Inquiry (1975-76). He published twelve major articles and presented twenty-two major papers at conferences on the assassination in the United States and Europe.

Evica also produced a weekly half-hour radio program which initially focused on the JFK assassination and related matters, and later covered a wide range of political topics from a so-called "radical" perspective. “Assassination Journal,” which was broadcast by the University of Hartford’s radio station WWUH from 1975 to 2007, continually expanded its investigative scope to include coups, murders, and mysteries such as TWA 800, the Gulf War Syndrome, and the failed war on drugs.


Ed McKeon, who also presented a show on the WWUH radio station, praised the work done by Evica: "I think it's very easy to go along your merry way in life and not have skepticism for what's presented to us, what's laid before us as the truth. I think that's the one thing I learned from him: You always ought to question authority, question what someone is trying to convince you is the truth. Truth is slippery, but for the good of ourselves, we need to pursue it."


Read more:



Approximately one month out from perhaps the most fraudulent funeral in modern times it remains astounding how so many otherwise sensible people could lie so unabashedly about an individual so evil.

For make no mistake, George Herbert Walker Bush was one of the more despicable entities of the Twentieth Century. From the early days of his involvement with the CIA and its entanglement in the assassination of John Kennedy (Director Hoover was absolutely convinced Bush played a major role) the "coincidence" Bush's brother Neil was to have a festive dinner with would-be Reagan assassin John Hinckley's very own brother Scott the night after the act (true story - look it up)

As compared to the makers of magnificent inventions, glorious artworks and the foundations of modern society - who all passed either alone, neglected or derided - there is the spectacle of George Herbert Walker Bush, a vile and odious man who has finally slinked off toward his loathsome dominion. That he was allowed to flourish and thrive and have a circus maximus of mourning says more of us than it does of him.

At any rate, the mendacities and fabrications concerning Bush are but fleeting things. No one of substance mourns. No person of consequence will long remember. No more breath need be spent on him.

For truly great men are in need of no fine words to praise them. Their eulogy is your love of their works and their legacy is the way in which you live your lives.

Guy Somerset writes from somewhere in America.

See more at


More to come.

Could you do something to remove the net around us?...

George and Jeanne de Mohrenschildt obtained a divorce in Dallas, Texas on April 3, 1973, after nearly fourteen years of marriage.[54] It was not reported in the local newspapers, and the couple continued to present themselves as husband and wife. [b]On September 17, 1976, the CIA requested that the FBI locate Mohrenschildt, because he had "attempted to get in touch with the CIA Director."[55] On September 5, 1976, Mohrenschildt had written a letter to the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, George H. W. Bush, asking for his assistance. He was acquainted with the Bush family; George H.W. Bush had roomed with Mohrenschildt's nephew, Edward G. Hooker, at Phillips Academy in AndoverMassachusetts.[56] The letter said:

You will excuse this hand-written letter. Maybe you will be able to bring a solution to the hopeless situation I find myself in. My wife and I find ourselves surrounded by some vigilantes; our phone bugged; and we are being followed everywhere. Either FBI is involved in this or they do not want to accept my complaints. We are driven to insanity by the situation. I have been behaving like a damn fool ever since my daughter Nadya died from [cystic fibrosis] over three years ago. I tried to write, stupidly and unsuccessfully, about Lee H Oswald and must have angered a lot of people — I do not know. But to punish an elderly man like myself and my highly nervous and sick wife is really too much. Could you do something to remove the net around us? This will be my last request for help and I will not annoy you any more. Good luck in your important job. Thank you so much.[57][58]

George H. W. Bush responded:

Let me say first that I know it must have been difficult for you to seek my help in the situation outlined in your letter. I believe I can appreciate your state of mind in view of your daughter's tragic death a few years ago, and the current poor state of your wife's health. I was extremely sorry to hear of these circumstances. In your situation I can well imagine how the attentions you described in your letter affect both you and your wife. However, my staff has been unable to find any indication of interest in your activities on the part of Federal authorities in recent years. The flurry of interest that attended your testimony before the Warren Commission has long subsided. I can only speculate that you may have become "newsworthy" again in view of the renewed interest in the Kennedy assassination, and thus may be attracting the attention of people in the media. I hope this letter had been of some comfort to you, George, although I realize I am unable to answer your question completely.
— George Bush, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. [CIA Exec Reg. # 76,51571 9.28.76][c]

On November 9, 1976, Jeanne had Mohrenschildt committed to a mental institution in Texas for three months, and listed in a notarized affidavit four previous suicide attempts while he was in the Dallas area. In the affidavit she stated that Mohrenschildt suffered from depression, heard voices, saw visions, and believed that the CIA and the Jewish Mafia were persecuting him. He was released at the end of the year, however.
According to the Dutch journalist Willem Oltmans, in 1967 a "serious and famous Dutch clairvoyant" named Gerard Croiset had a vision of a conspirator who had manipulated Oswald;[59] his description led Oltmans to Mohrenschildt, and the two stayed in touch. In 1977, Oltmans went to Texas and brought Mohrenschildt to the Netherlands.[59] Oltmans claimed that he had rescued Mohrenschildt from a mental institution to bring him to the "famous" clairvoyant, Croiset. According to Oltmans, Croiset agreed that Mohrenschildt was the man he saw in his vision.
Oltmans says that after Mohrenschildt arrived in the Netherlands, he invited him out with some Russian friends. They went to Brussels and had plans to go to Liège, a city in the French-speaking part of Belgium. Oltmans owned a house in the countryside not far from Liège. Upon returning to Brussels, Mohrenschildt went for a short walk from which he failed to return. He had earlier agreed to meet Oltmans and his friends for lunch. Oltmans waited for him but he did not come back.[60]

Read more:

Read from top.

A comedy of errors or a well-crafted conspiracy?



This is a double-cross play by Leonikaspeare.



List of main characters:



President John (Jack) Kennedy. Dead.


His wife, Jacqueline “They killed my husband”…


His “murderer” Lee Harvey Oswald who shot John Kennedy in the neck. 


Lee Harvey Oswald’s murderer, Jack Ruby who shot one bullet while planning to shoot three.


The Secret Service personnel, recovering from a “night on the town”, on the fatal day.


Various doctors who did autopsy under duress and secrecy.


George Hickey, the Secret Service agent who "most likely" shot John Kennedy with the explosive bullet.


The explosive bullet.


The magic bullet.


Uncle George.




The plot


In 1963 many organizations wanted to get rid of President Kennedy and his brother Robert.


The Russians have been mentioned that after having been “humiliated” by Kennedy forcing the retreat of their nuke missile from Cuba could have done the deed. In fact, the deal was that Russia would pull out of Cuba AS LONG AS THE US REMOVED its own nukes from Europe and surroundings. The deal was 50/50, possibly a tad in favor of Russia, but 100 per cent in favor of non-confrontation. The media saw zip.



Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) was a loose cannon with major psychological issues. One clever “handler” could manipulate LHO’s moods and desires of notoriety. His attempt at killing a right wing general, General Edwin Anderson Walker, was quite in line with LHO’s “leftist-communist” expressed views, but killing a democratic (considered of the left) President is very much on the borderline side in LHO’s scope of deed for “becoming famous”. Someone would have sowed the seeds in LHO’s mind. And was LHO really a communist or was he playing a double game? Was de Mohrenschildt his "handler? Note de Mohrenschildt had some "connection with the CIA, through G HW Bush and possibly higer up, though he was "not welcome" there for being a Nazi. Was missing killing the General PART OF THE PLAN?


Connection with Cuba: LHO was distributing leaflets to support the Cuban revolution but did not manage to reach Cuba (refused Visa). His love of Cuba could have been manipulated to make him hate President Kennedy who had muffed “the Bay of Pigs” invasion. Here it is possible to speculate that the invasion organized by the CIA was leaked at the highest level to the Castro regime. 



Jack Ruby,  is another loose cannon. He is a nightclub owner with a massive amount of debt. Connection with Cuba: he was disappointed with Cuba before the Castro revolution. Like LHO, he was somewhat emphatic about the Cuban revolution. 


By then the US administration, possibly without approval from President Kennedy, tried over and over to retake Cuba and/or assassinate Castro (a bit less than 200 attempts)


Some friends of Jack Ruby said that jack did shoot LHO “for the money”. Ruby said murdering LHO was not premeditated. Evidence POINTS THE OTHER WAY. Ruby PLANNED to kill LHO. Ruby was condemned to death, but before his second trial where he promised to “tell all” went ahead he died in Prison from cancer in 1967.




The Secret Service people who were a sad bumbling lot on “that day”.  They did everything that could go wrong go wrong. 




The CIA meanwhile was bubbling along as the CIA does:


John Alex McCone

November 29, 1961–April 28, 1965

  • Appointed by President John F. Kennedy on September 27, 1961
  • Sworn in as recess appointee on November 29
  • Confirmed by the Senate on January 31, 1962
  • Sworn in on February 13


After the disaster of the Bay of Pigs Invasion, ( Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)-sponsored paramilitary group Brigade 2506 on 17 April 1961) President John F. Kennedy[6] forced the resignation of CIA director Allen Dulles and some of his staff. McCone replaced Dulles as DCI on November 29, 1961.[7]


McCone was not Kennedy's first choice; the President had tentatively offered the job to Clark Clifford, his personal lawyer, who politely refused (Clifford would later serve as Secretary of Defense for Lyndon Johnson); and then to Fowler Hamilton, a Wall Street lawyer with experience in government service during the Roosevelt and Truman administrations. Hamilton accepted, but when a problem developed at the Agency for International Development, he was shifted there.[9] Thus Kennedy, urged on by his brother Robert, turned to McCone.[9]


He was a key figure in the Executive Committee of the National Security Council (EXCOMM) during the October 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. In the Honeymoon telegram of September 20, 1962, he insisted that the CIA remain imaginative when it came to Soviet weapons policy towards Cuba, as a September 19 National Intelligence Estimate had concluded it unlikely that nuclear missiles would be placed on the island. The telegram was so named because McCone sent it while on his honeymoon in Paris, France, accompanied not only by his bride, Theiline McGee Pigott but by a CIA cipher team.[10]


McCone's suspicions of the inaccuracy of this assessment proved to be correct, as it was later found out the Soviet Union had followed up its conventional military buildup with the installation of MRBMs (Medium Range Ballistic Missiles) and IRBMs (Intermediate Range Ballistic Missiles), sparking off the crisis in October when they were later spotted by CIA's Lockheed U-2 surveillance flights.


While McCone was DCI, the CIA was involved in many covert plots; according to Admiral Stansfield Turner (who himself later served as DCI from 1977 to 1981, under President Jimmy Carter), these included:[11]


In the Dominican Republic, the CIA had armed an assassination plot to take out President Rafael Leonidas Trujillo Molina. After the Bay of Pigs, Kennedy wanted the project stopped because it was too soon for another debacle. The problem is that once you encourage and arm a group of highly motivated locals, you can't just turn them off. Trujillo's enemies gunned him down dramatically, though technically speaking without U.S. help.


In Laos, the CIA backed the Hmong (then known by the derogatory name Meo) people of the highlands to fight a counterinsurgency. This set off a complicated three-way civil war that hit the Hmong hard.


In Ecuador, the CIA helped overthrow President José Velasco Ibarra. His replacement didn't last long before the CIA turned on him, looking for greater stability and allegiance.


In British Guiana, the CIA stirred up trouble through the labor unions to take down the democratically elected Cheddi Jagan.


In Cuba, there was Mongoose, a secret campaign against Castro.



We have already mentioned the other organizations that wanted to get rid of President Kennedy and his brother Robert:



—  The Mafia


—  The anti-communist Russians


—  The Cuban refugees


—  The CIA


—  The army brass protective of general Walker.


—  The Nazis


—  J. Edgar Hoover (fiercely Republican) FBI Director from 1924 to 1972 (48 years!).


—  Crooked unions


— gambling rings


—  The Neocons.


Here we need to add the Secret Service…  OR SOMEONE SENT TO THE SECRET SERVICE TO DO THE DEED.


Who could make the links between all these and “help” eliminate John Kennedy?






After their night on town, ALL the Secret Service agents were worse for wear — except Hickey who had not joined them... They had drunk all night, “played with girls” and by 5.00 AM had to rally for their 8.00 AM briefing. Some agents of various “sections” had quarrelled and some of the most experienced ones were “left behind”. One at the airport and the other one, at one stage, was strangely relegated to the last car of the “Presidential procession” as running/walking by the side of the car. He apparently gave up and went back to base. Meanwhile George Hickey — who had been employed by the Secret service, mostly as a chauffeur, FOR LESS THAN FOUR MONTHS — had been designated to return the presidential car back to the airport once the show was over. He was sober, the only one sober on duty. Being in the following car, Hickey had been entrusted with an AR 15 — a new lightweight semi-automatic weapon armed with “explosive” bullets. 


The story goes that the Secret service never have had a traitor in their ranks.


They never have had a snitch either.  This is why Hickey became protected species, especially at the autopsies that clearly showed the bullet that blew JFK’s brain came from his AR 15 (or from a gun with the same calibre).  This was the fourth bullet (an “explosive” bullet as demonstrated by the damage and the shrapnel left in the President brain — that is to say the bullet was not a full metal jacket, designed to break in many pieces on impact, thus inflict maximum damage.) fired by Hickey (or "someone" in the motorcade) this bullet was the one that destroyed Kennedy’s brain. This is classified information as to protect the US Secret Service. As well, the bullet entry hole of the bullet from the AR 15 (less than 6 mm) was demonstratively smaller than that coming from LHO’s gun (7 mm).


The reasons:


Why would Hickey (or someone from the Secret Service) shoot the president? 


The maximum loony explanation that has been floated so far was that Hickey goofed and pulled the trigger willy-nilly when the first shot coming from LHO came through: one hit, two misses in less than 6 seconds. Note: this would have been an amazing feat produced by LHO that only one expert sharp-shooter managed to “reproduce” with bull-eyes in tests done with the type of gun used by LHO.


But the show from start to finish could look like a bad dangerous stupid Laurel and Hardy routine or a well organised double-cross.  A lot of elements had to be taken cared of from start to finish, including getting the Secret service agents boozed up. Though people say that the US spy agencies and secret service were “naïve” at the time, I cannot buy that there was no conspiracy to kill JFK. There was. 


How to make a Shakespearean play about this murdering conspiracy?


Was Hickey a plant sent from the CIA? Who managed Hickey before he joined "the Secret Service"?


Or was there another person using same "explosive" bullet size, near the president, who took the shot — say using a hand gun? GUN SMOKE was CLEARLY seen coming from the car — either the presidential car or the car immediately behind, as the cars were moving forward...


More in the next instalment




Gus Leonisky


Conspiracy analyst




Read from top.


See also:

a certain arrogance...

a magic bullet and an explosive bullet.

Lee Harvey Oswald may have shot only two bullets.


One was the “magic bullet” that hit president Kennedy in the neck and went through Governor Connolly’s shoulder before exiting through his right wrist. It was said to be magic for its trajectory was see weirdly skewed at first but when the position of the Governor was reassessed, it was see as going in a straight line.


The second bullet by LHO hit the road surface. To some extend, I believe that had Oswald missed the President entirely, this would not have made any difference. Kennedy was a dead man. “They killed my husband!”


The third Oswald bullet was thought to have been fired, but had not been so. There were two spent cartridges next to Oswald gun on the floor of the room of the sixth floor of the Book Repository Building, while the third one was away in another corner of the room. It was an old spent cartridge used by LHO like many hunters always keep one in the breech of the gun to prevent damage to the firing mechanism, or such. Forensic would soon have proven that it had not been fired on that day. Forensic were shoddy. Police made a crook job.


This is why, during tests, ONLY ONE expert marksman amongst many, Donahue, had managed to fire 3 bullets in less than six seconds, including performing the clunky reloading of the Italian made gun. Oswald had only fired 2 bullets


The third (and fourth) bullet(s) came from within the motorcade and only one bullet was fired. The fourth was the echo of the third bullet. The sounds were telling. From certain vantage points, the first and second bullets from Oswald could not be heard. The third and its immediate echo were clear. Ballistic would have shown then (as they did later on) that the third bullet came from a different angle — and could not have come from LHO’s shooting position.


So there was another shooter involved. Was it Hickey? No test was performed on his gun, the famous AR 15 with the “explosive” bullets. The AR 15 became the M16 and fires 5.56 mm bullets.


The .223 Remington (a.k.a.: 5.56×45mm or M193) is a rifle cartridge developed in 1957, for the ArmaLite AR-15. In 1964, the ArmaLite AR-15 was adopted by the United States Army as the M16 rifle and it would later become the standard U.S. Military rifle. The military version of the cartridge uses a 55 gr full metal jacket bullet and was designated M193. In 1980, the .223 Remington was transformed into a new cartridge, a 62 gr full metal jacket bullet with a seven grain steel core for better penetration and designated 5.56×45mm NATO(a.k.a.: SS109 or M855).[3]


So it appears that on autopsy of Kennedy, the bullet that took half of the president’s brain was a high velocity 5.57 (.223) Remington. Not a 6.8 low velocity Carcano projectile that would have gone “clean through”. The bullet was NOT A FULL METAL either. That is to say, this type of .223 bullet was exclusive to the Secret Service and designed to “explode” (break up in many pieces) in order to inflict maximum damage. The usage of “explosive” bullets on the battlefields had been made illegal by war “convention” in 1923. 


The autopsy in Washington was semi-botched up, performed under distracting pressure from the Secret Service personnel and many other people present INSIDE THE ROOM. The doctor in charge called it a CIRCUS. He could not do his job properly. Pictures taken by the special coroner photographer and his assistant were never seen again. The X-rays showed the typical fragments of a Secret Service specially modified .223 bullet having “exploded”. The X-ray plates were never seen again.


The President’s body had been entirely stripped of his clothes and the results of the preliminary investigation in Dallas hospital were not supplied to the doctors in Washington. The body had been placed into a plastic bag that had become “bloodied”.


Expanding bullets, also known colloquially as dumdum bullets, are projectiles designed to expand on impact, increasing in diameter to limit penetration and/or produce a larger diameter wound for faster incapacitating of a living target. For this reason they are used for hunting and by some police departments, but are generally prohibited for use in war. Two typical designs are the hollow-point bullet and the soft-point bullet. Exploding bullets are designed to shatter in many pieces and even do more damage.



No wonder the Secret Service personnel inside the autopsy room were nervous and tried to thwart the autopsy by giving strict instructions and by distracting the doctors


At this stage, there is 99.99 per cent chance that the Secret Service killed the President. Who? 


Hickey? Hickey was the only one with the AR 15. Was there another weapon, a secret handgun that could fire this kind of bullet? 


Hickey sued Donahue and the publisher of his book “ Fatal Error” in which Donahue blames Hickey for accidental shooting of the President. Hickey’s life is weird. We still don’t know if he died in 2005 or 2011. 


Mortal Error: The Shot That Killed JFK is a 1992 non-fiction book by Bonar Menninger outlining a theory by sharpshootergunsmith and ballistics expert Howard Donahue that a Secret Service agent accidentally fired the shot that actually killed President John F. Kennedy.[1][2] Mortal Error was published by St Martin's Press in hardback, paperback, and audiobook.


Prior to the publication of the book in 1992, both the publisher and the author contacted Hickey to invite his participation in the book and offering him a chance to respond to the allegations. In 1995 Hickey sued St. Martin's Press over the claims made in Mortal Error.[22][23] The suit was eventually dismissed in 1997 on the grounds that Hickey had waited too long after the book's initial publication to file against the publisher.[24] Hickey refiled suit when the paper-back edition was published, and later settled with St Martin's Press in 1998 on undisclosed terms.[25]


Sources state that Hickey died in either 2005[26][27] or 2011.[28][29][30]



One reviewer of the book says:


David Von Pein


"Mortal Error's" Theory Doesn't Hold Up At All When Weighed Against The Evidence That Says It Never Happened


January 19, 2006


Format: Hardcover

The theory put forth in the book "Mortal Error" -- a kooky-as-all-get-out hunk of nonsense that has Secret Service Agent George W. Hickey Jr. accidentally firing the fatal gunshot into President John F. Kennedy's head in the midst of an assassination attempt being carried out by Lee Harvey Oswald in Dallas' Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963 -- is a thoroughly preposterous and untenable theory, and there are several reasons why.

To begin with, the very idea that Agent Hickey would have actually had the extreme misfortune of being able to "find" JFK's head just perfectly via his one "accidental shot" that was discharged from his AR-15 rifle (and miss everything else and everybody else, miraculously, in between himself and JFK) is just way too far-fetched a notion for anyone to seriously consider as fact.

Giving credence to such a crazy theory would mean literally ignoring so many common-sense things (and ignoring so much evidence and witnesses), it's pathetic. Such as: You'd have to believe that Hickey just kept his mouth shut about the "accident" with his AR-15 rifle. And you'd have to believe that David Powers, a friend and personal aide of JFK's, who was sitting in the very same car as Agent Hickey, had somehow not even noticed this rifle blast going off just inches behind where he was seated (or you'll have to believe that Powers was "in" on the "cover-up" which would have followed, which is nonsense of the first order; Powers would be the very last person I'd suspect of covering up anything with respect to JFK's death).

If Hickey had truly fired that fatal shot, you'd also have to swallow that every one of the many other SS agents in that follow-up car in the motorcade either ALL didn't hear the loud rifle shot from right inside their own vehicle...or that all of these agents lied later on when none of them corroborated such a shot from Hickey's weapon. Logical? Hardly.

Plus: No witness that I am aware of claimed to have heard a shot being fired from around the area of "Queen Mary" (the SS code name for the Secret Service follow-up car), which is yet another annoying fly in this theory's ointment.

And the biggie -- If a Hickey shot killed the President, then a logical and reasonable explanation needs to be put forth to explain away the two large bullet fragments that were conclusively proven to have been fired from Lee Harvey Oswald's very own Carcano rifle that were found in the front-seat area of the Presidential limousine. And this book does not contain such a logical answer to that critical flaw within such a "Hickey Did It" theory.

Oswald fired three shots from the southeast corner window of the 6th Floor of his workplace (the Texas School Book Depository). The evidence supporting this fact is overwhelming. And it's obvious that his second shot (aka the "Single-Bullet Theory" shot) didn't produce the badly-damaged bullet fragments that were discovered on 11/22/63 in the limo's front seat. And, IMO, Oswald's first (missed) shot could not have caused the limo fragments either.




There are many flaws in this comment made in 2006. Further publications such as JFK The Smoking Gun by Colin McLaren published in 2013, give a lot more of the forensic details of why a Secret Service “explosive” bullet  blew up the president brain, not the LHO’s Carcano bullets, of which only two were fired. McLaren went through the Warren report and subsequent release of documents, with a painstaking eye-watering investigation.


In this book, Hickey is still the culprit, by accident…


But was it an accident or a design?...


Who could have masterminded the whole operation?



McLaren makes reference to the Secret service and other services in the US spy industry being very coy about telling the truth. We shall see.



More to come

too many bumbling idiots for comfort...


More bumbling idiots or psychologically manipulated troops?


The farce becomes more farcical. 



We know from history that such complex intrigues, as setting up the murder of JFK, have happened in the past. The most recent deception being the war on Saddam, in 2003. The person happy to be the happy bumbling idiot then was President George W Bush himself — but he really was a clever con artist employed to sell an illegal war and other shocking trimmings. 


The death of Duke Ferdinand that sparked WW1 had been set up with no less than with six possible terrorists and positions along the route of his visit. Throughout history, bumbling idiots, mad men and "witches" have been manipulated by various devious characters in order to get a particular political result. We cannot see why the assassination of JFK is different. The bumbling idiots are under subconscious psychological manipulation to do what they feel is the “right thing” which is part of a guiding giant conspiracy.




Police Chief Curry was a clown. Captain Fritz became a clown.


DA Wade and Dallas Police Chief Curry rarely saw eye to eye. After the arrest of Lee Harvey Oswald, District Attorney Wade ordered Curry to take Oswald immediately to prison. But Curry delegated the circus show to Captain Fritz who, as an old fashioned type police officer, would interview him in there, away from the huge melee of FBI agents, secret service personnel, a ranger, some homicide detectives and a swarm journalists that had ben pressing the Chief for grabs and one liners. The DA was furious that Fritz was also showing the gun and other “evidence” Oswald had used, to the press. Oswald himself was smiling and flippant, enjoying the limelight. By whatever process, Fritz, possibly discovering the new world of fame, did not execute the order from the DA and kept parading like a peacock with his talking piece of bread in handcuffs — Oswald — contrarily to his normal successful technique of interviewing a crook, with a good cop, bad cop routine.


Fritz became ready to be plucked. Ruby came along and shot Oswald dead.


How come? Was Fritz under “instructions” to delay Oswald prison incarceration, waiting for the next installment of the drama — the shooting of Oswald by whomever — or has he just become a silly show-pony for the first time of his life, so close to retirement? Either way, the next installment was somehow inevitable, unless strick security was adhered to — and even so. Oswald could not live any longer. Ruby or someone else would kill him, soon. LHO had fulfilled his purpose of fall guy and no loose end could be left behind. He could not be left to talk.


The same happened with David Kelly in 2003.


This farce has actually been a sad drama of farcical dimension. People die and the plot thickens.  Before his arrest, Oswald had shot a policeman who died, with his revolver.


Ruby was also a mad man. Who had pushed his buttons? He says he did shoot Oswald out of his own will and “on the spur of the moment” but was he really going to reveal who paid him for the deed, when he himself died of cancer? He would have had to know that having shot Kennedy's "killer" was not going to make him popular with the authorities — those trying to understand why JFK had been shot. A hero's welcome would have been out of the question, though one would mitigate the sentence, using Ruby's "patriotism".


So why would these people do it?


The more problematic "idiot" here is George Hickey. Who made him join the “elite” of the Secret Services as a 2ndchauffeur and why had this “probie” been armed with the only AR15 gun, by the time JFK was shot? He had the AR 15, ONE bullet of which most likely (99.9 per cent) blew the President’s brain away. Accident? this makes no sense. 


Today, someone asked me why is it important to know such “old” history. Most people don’t care who shot JFK anymore. Life goes on… 


The answer is simple: this crap did not stop with JFK’s assassination. It carries on daily and we see fuck all, because our media is either brain-dead, eager to collect subscriptions or totally in bed with the running gag that is the comic opera running our western governments. We've already forgotten the death of Jamal Khashoggi...


The Russian and Chinese governments have their own problems but they are not so infused in deceit, which seems to be the currency driving most of the Western Countries psyches... The “gilet jaunes” have had enough of this crap but do they know how deep this cancer goes. Is excising some more cash for pension from Macron's arse enough to kill the beast? Can we be bought off? Yes! No! Look at Brexit! 


Anyway SOMEONE in the Secret Service had been told to get rid of JFK. This was done. This had not been an “accident”. The planners of the stint wanted someone to blame for it (Lee Harvey Oswald) as a fall back position, wanted someone (a secret service personnel) who really made sure Kennedy was dead, they needed someone who would get rid of the evidence of the conspiracy-link (kill Oswald) — as any psychologist worth his/her salt would have managed to get from him, with cross referencing, the guff and they someone who would interfere with all the investigation and autopsies galore. Far fetched?...


For some this would seem too big a conspiracy to be believed. To this I would say look at the Saddam’s Weapons of Mass destruction conspiracy. This was thousand times harder to construct on a global scale than manipulate a few clowns and the media on the JFK case. 


The most likely link of who shot JFK was the white supremacists, as they were hounded by the Kennedys with reforms. The most likely link was Uncle George — a full-blown White Russian/Nazi with Jewish and CIA connections — and Ruby was a Jew.


When Robert Kennedy was killed, this was done because of the “Kennedys’” link with Israel, which to say the least had become a country of supremacists (mostly white), since its inception.


Another link was the fellow — the "pimping officer" — who organized the sexual affairs of JFK. Was he one of the clowns?


More to come






Read from top.

by now you should know the secret service killed JFK...


The unpleasant truth is that the 35th U.S. President became so despised by the most right-wing and militarist elements in the intelligence apparatus — provoked by his perceived treachery in diplomacy toward Cuba and placation of the Soviet Union following the foreign policy disasters of the Cuban Missile Crisis and Bay of Pigs and apparent desire to deescalate the war in Vietnam — that they most likely removed him in a coup. The extent to which Kennedy was sincere in those efforts is another matter, although it was confirmed in declassified documents last year that he had rejected the proposed Operation Northwoods which would have carried out ‘false flag’ bombings in Miami to be blamed on Fidel Castro which shockingly made it all the way up the chain of command past the Joint Chiefs of Staff for approval. Why is it outlandish for people to suspect they could have done something similar on 9/11?

For Americans to learn the ugly facts behind JFK’s murder, plausibly located in the more than 15,000 documents still concealed from public view, would destroy the foundations of the national security state and the establishment it safeguards. It is on this basis that for more than half a century, corporate-owned media has stifled the multitude of admissions about the assassination brought to light, even when they’ve come from Hollywood movies. What we are witnessing today in the Russiagate fiasco with the “fake news” PSY-OP is an updated version of the CIA’s enlistment of the media following the JFK assassination to orchestrate public opinion which made the phrase ‘conspiracy theory’ a universal pejorative.

Read more:


Oswald's shots did not kill JFK. One Oswald's shot hit JFK in the neck, the other hit the road, but a secret service "explosive" bullet from an AR 15 of the Secret Service blew his brain off. This is not a conspiracy theory. This is the exposure of a conspiracy to kill a president. Presently, there is a conspiracy designed to remove President Trump from office. This is not a conspiracy theory. This is a conspiracy as clear as night and day. 

Mueller has been at digging the grave so deep to bury Trump that Mueller might actually bury himself. His office had to refute BuzzFeed.



Special counsel Robert Mueller's office disputed an explosive story from BuzzFeed News as "not accurate" Friday night, after the news outlet reported the President had directed his personal attorney Michael Cohen to lie to Congress, for which Cohen was later prosecuted.

"BuzzFeed's description of specific statements to the Special Counsel's Office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen's Congressional testimony are not accurate," said Peter Carr, a spokesman for Mueller's office, in a statement.It's highly unusual for the special counsel's office to provide a statement to the media -- outside of court filings and judicial hearings -- about any of its ongoing investigative activities.
Read more:

What is this all about? Nothing to do with whether Russia helped Trump win the Presidency or not (which Russia did not but our own Rupert Murcoch did) — but about silly side-issues to frame the debate/spectacle for the Western media awaiting the downfall of Trump. I believe that Trump will survive the storm because the storm is merely a fart over a teacup... And the liberal media can't get enough of the smell... 
Buzzfeed could be in par with that UK rubbish that call itself "ii"

Read from top.

conspiracy realities...

books to read...



Read more:



JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters is a book by theologian and Catholic Worker James W. Douglass (Orbis Books, 2008; Touchstone Books, an imprint of Simon & Schuster, 2010) that analyzes the presidency of John F. Kennedy as well as the events surrounding the assassination of John F. Kennedy. The book is drawn from many sources, including the Warren Report. The book's central thesis is that Kennedy was a cold warrior who turned to peace-making, and that as a result he was killed by his own security apparatus.[1]

Published by the Maryknoll Fathers and Brothers, it received an award from the Catholic Press Association and coverage in the religious press; sales shot up after Oliver Stone recommended the book, with it featuring in's Top 100 for a week.[2] The 2013 edition of the book was endorsed by Kennedy's nephew Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., who said it had moved him to visit Dealey Plaza for the first time.[3]



Read more:


Read from top.

the strange murder of bobby...

Who killed Bobby Kennedy? His son RFK Jr. doesn’t believe it was Sirhan Sirhan.

By Tom Jackman June 5, 2018

LOS ANGELES — Just before Christmas, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. pulled up to the massive Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility, a California state prison complex in the desert outside San Diego that holds nearly 4,000 inmates. Kennedy was there to visit Sirhan B. Sirhan, the man convicted of killing his father, Sen. Robert F. Kennedy, nearly 50 years ago.

While his wife, the actress Cheryl Hines, waited in the car, Kennedy met with Sirhan for three hours, he revealed to The Washington Post last week. It was the culmination of months of research by Kennedy into the assassination, including speaking with witnesses and reading the autopsy and police reports.

“I got to a place where I had to see Sirhan,” Kennedy said. He would not discuss the specifics of their conversation. But when it was over, Kennedy had joined those who believe there was a second gunman, and that it was not Sirhan who killed his father.


Several other witnesses also said he was not close enough to place the gun against Kennedy’s back, where famed Los Angeles coroner Thomas Noguchi found powder burns on the senator’s jacket and on his hair, indicating shots fired at close contact. These witnesses provided more proof for those who insist a second gunman was involved.


Read more:



Read from top...

misunderstaing assassinations...

Assassinations that take place in a democracy, he says, rarely have a destabilising effect.

"A successful assassination attempt of a democratic leader does not lead that country, on average, to fall back and become a dictatorship relative to a failed attempt," he says.

Dr Newton says assassins mistakenly conflate institutions with the public figure at their helm.


Read more:


This is VERY naive. The point of an assassination of a political figure such as JFK is OFTEN hidden and conspiratorial. THE COURSE OF HISTORY IS CHANGED, even if the country such as the USA does not become a "dictatorhip". As explained from top to bottom of this line of articles, JFK was assassinated by the secret services — not by Oswald, who was used a the fall guy, though he managed to shoot one (non-fatal) bullet through JFK's neck. The killer bullet came from the "deep state", through the secret service (also possibly supported by the Mafia, the White Russians and the anti-Castro Cubans) that resented Kennedy's moves towards PEACE on this planet.

The death of JFK encouraged the Vietnam War development and more US crap-war in the world. HISTORY GOT CHANGED (or it continued with the planned profitable war crap).


See also the assassination of the Archduke in: 

the WW1 conspiracy...

not just politics as usual...

George (relating to George Washington) was a glossy monthly magazine centered on the theme of politics-as-lifestyle founded by John F. Kennedy Jr. and Michael J. Berman with publisher Hachette Filipacchi Media U.S. in New York City in September 1995. Its tagline was "Not Just Politics As Usual." It was published from 1995 to 2001.


Read more:


It could be seen as ironic that the name "George" became a kind of catalyst for the Kennedys. No Judgement is passed here on the name, but one should read from top and possibly suspect some subconscious motivation for John F. Kennedy Jr.

Uncle George (see at top), George Washington and the George W Bushes seem to have brought a controversial momentum to the USA — George meaning the tiller of the soil (farmer) and being the patron saint of England, who struggled with a fire breathing dragon symbolizing the devil... until the Donald appeared, after Barak, the lightning...

Ah history AND religion...



Saint George (GreekΓεώργιοςGeṓrgiosLatinGeorgius; d. 23 April 303[4]) was a soldier of Palestinian and Greek origins, and a member of the Praetorian Guard for Roman emperor Diocletian, who was sentenced to death for refusing to recant his Christian faith. He became one of the most venerated saints and megalo-martyrs in Christianity, and was especially venerated as a military saint since the Crusaders.

In hagiography, as one of the Fourteen Holy Helpers and one of the most prominent military saints, he is immortalised in the legend of Saint George and the Dragon. His memorial, Saint George's Day, is traditionally celebrated on 23 April.


A Greek Palestinian...




joining some dots...

When Senator Robert Kennedy was assassinated on June 5, 1968, the American public fell into an hypnotic trance in which they have remained ever since. The overwhelming majority accepted what was presented by government authorities as an open and shut case that a young Palestinian American, Sirhan Sirhan, had murdered RFK because of his support for Israel, a false accusation whose ramifications echo down the years. That this was patently untrue and was contradicted by overwhelming evidence made no difference.

Sirhan did not kill Robert Kennedy, yet he remains in jail to this very day. Robert Kennedy, Jr., who was 14 years old at the time of his father’s death, has visited Sirhan in prison, claims he is innocent, and believes there was another gunman. Paul Schrade, an aide to the senator and the first person shot that night, also says Sirhan didn’t do it. Both have plenty of evidence. And they are not alone.

There is a vast body of documented evidence to prove this, an indisputably logical case marshalled by serious writers and researchers. Lisa Pease is the latest. It is a reason why a group of 60 prominent Americans has recently called for a reopening of, not just this case, but those of JFK, MLK, and Malcom X. The blood of these men cries out for the revelation of the truth that the United States national security state and its media accomplices have fought so mightily to keep hidden for so many years.

That they have worked so hard at this reveals how dangerous the truth about these assassinations still is to this secret government that wages propaganda war against the American people and real wars around the world. It is a government of Democrats, Republicans, and their intelligence allies working together today to confuse the American people and provoke Russia in a most dangerous game that could lead to nuclear war, a possibility that so frightened JFK and RFK after the Cuban Missile Crisis that they devoted themselves to ending the Cold War, reconciling with the Soviet Union, abolishing nuclear weapons, reining in of the power of the CIA, and withdrawing from Vietnam. That is why they were killed.

The web of deceit surrounding the now officially debunked Democratic led Russia-gate propaganda operation that has strengthened Trump to double-down on his anti-Russia operations (a Democratic goal) is an example of the perfidious and sophisticated mutuality of this game of mass mind-control.

The killing of the Kennedys and today’s new Cold War and war against terror are two ends of a linked intelligence operation.

Moreover, more than any other assassination of the 1960s, it is the killing of Bobby Kennedy that has remained shrouded in the most ignorance.

It is one of the greatest propaganda success stories of American history.

In her exhaustive new examination of the case, A Lie Too Big To Fail, Lisa Pease puts it succinctly at the conclusion of her unravelling of the official lies that have mesmerized the public:


The assassination of the top four leaders of the political left in the five year period – President John Kennedy in 1963, Malcolm X in 1965, and Martin Luther King, Jr. and Senator Robert Kennedy in 1968 – represented nothing less than a slow-motion coup on the political scene. 


If anyone wishes to understand what has happened to the United States since this coup, and thus to its countless victims at home and throughout the world, one must understand these assassinations and how the alleged assassins were manipulated by the coup organizers and how the public was hoodwinked in a mind-control operation on a vast scale. It is not ancient history, for the forces that killed these leaders rule the U.S. today, and their ruthlessness has subsequently informed the actions of almost all political leaders in the years since. A bullet to the head when you seriously talk about peace and justice is a not so gentle reminder to toe the line or else.

“But the way the CIA took over America in the 1960s is the story of our time,”writes Pease, “and too few recognize this. We can’t fix a problem we can’t even acknowledge exists.” Nothing could be truer.

Lisa Pease has long recognized the problem, and for the past twenty-five years, she has devoted herself to shedding light on the CIA’s culpability, particularly in the Robert Kennedy case. Few people possess the grit and grace to spend so much of their lives walking this path of truth.

The extent of her research is dazzling, so dazzling in its voluminous detail that a reviewer can only touch on it here and there. She has written a book that is daunting in its comprehensiveness. It demands focused attention and perseverance, for it runs to over 500 pages with more than 800 footnotes. This book will remain a touchstone for future research on the RFK assassination, whether one agrees or disagrees with all of her detailed findings and speculations. For this book is so vast and meticulous in its examination of all aspects of the case that one can surely find areas that one might question or disagree with.

Nevertheless, Pease fundamentally proves that Sirhan did not shoot RFK and that there was a conspiracy organized and carried out by shadowy intelligence forces that did so. These same forces worked with the Los Angeles Police Department, federal, state, and judicial elements to make sure Sirhan was quickly accused of being the lone assassin and dispatched to prison after a show trial. And the mass media carried out its assigned role of affirming the government’s case to shield the real killers and to make sure the cover-up was successful.

No doubt others will investigate this case further. Yet I think no more research is really needed, for as with these other assassinations, additional analyses will only result in pseudo-debates about minutiae. Such debates will only serve to prolong the hallucinatory grip the perpetrators of these crimes have on a day of reckoning, suggesting as they would that we do not really know what happened. This is an old tactic meant to delay forevermore such a day of reckoning.

The facts are clear for all to see if they have the will to truth. All that is now needed is a public tribunal, which is planned for later this year, in which the fundamental, clear-cut facts of these cases are presented to the American public. In the case of Robert Kennedy’s assassination as with the others, a little knowledge goes a long way, and only those who are closed to basic logic and evidence will refuse to see that government forces conspired to kill these men and did so because all were seeking peace and justice that was then, and is now, a threat to the war-making forces of wealth and power that control the American government.
Pease writes:


Anyone who has looked closely and honestly at the evidence has realized that more than one person was involved in Robert Kennedy’s death. So why can’t reporters see this? Why can’t the media explain this? Because the media and the government are two sides of the same coin, and those who challenge the government’s version of history, as numerous reporters have found out, all too often lose status and sometimes whole careers. Kristina Borjesson published an anthology of such stories in her book Into the Buzzsaw, in which journalists describe how they lost their careers when each of them expressed a truth that the government did not want exposed. 


Lisa Pease discloses such truths. I am reporting on her work. Therefore, the mainstream media, except for an extraordinary reporter or two, such as Tom Jackman of The Washington Post, will likely ignore both of us, but the publication where you are reading this is on the side of truth, and in the disclosure of truth lies our hope.

Since more than one person was involved in the killing of RFK, there was – ipso facto – a conspiracy. This is not theory but fact. The fact of a conspiracy. For more than fifty years, mainstream reporters have been cowed by this word “conspiracy,” thanks to the CIA. Many others have been intelligence assets posing as journalists, regurgitating the lies. This is a fact.

The official story is that after giving his victory speech for winning the 1968 Democratic California Primary, Kennedy, as he was walking through a crowded hotel pantry, was shot by Sirhan Sirhan, who was standing to his left between 3-6 feet away. Sirhan’s revolver held eight bullets, and as he was shooting, he was tackled by a group of large men who subdued him. All witnesses place Sirhan in front of Kennedy and all claim he was firing a gun.

Fact: As the autopsy definitively showed, RFK was shot from the rear at point blank range, three bullets entering his body, with the fatal headshot coming upward at a 45-degree angle from 1-3 inches behind his right ear. Not one bullet from Sirhan’s gun hit the Senator. In addition, an audio recording shows that many more bullets than the eight in Sirhan’s gun were fired in the hotel pantry that night. It was impossible for Sirhan to have killed RFK.

Let me repeat: More than one gunman, contrary to the government’s claims, equals a conspiracy. So why lie about that?

What is amazing is that the obvious conclusion to such simple syllogistic logic (Sirhan in front, bullets in the back, therefore…) that a child could understand has been dismissed by the authorities for fifty-one years. The fact that the government authorities – the LAPD, the Sheriff’s Office, the District Attorney, federal and state government officials, the FBI, the CIA – have from the start so assiduously done all in their power to pin the blame on “a lone assassin,” Sirhan, proves they are part of a coordinated cover-up, which in turn suggests their involvement in the crime.

The fact that Robert Kennedy was shot from the back and not the front where Sirhan was standing immediately brings to mind the Zapruder film that shows that JFK was killed from the front right and not from the 6th floor rear where Oswald was allegedly shooting from. That unexpected film evidence was hidden from the public for many years, but when it was finally seen, the case for a government conspiracy was solidified.

While no such video evidence has surfaced in the RFK case, the LAPD made sure that no photographic evidence contradicting the official lies would be seen. As Lisa Pease writes:

Less than two months after the assassination, the LAPD took the extraordinary step of burning some 2,400 photos from the case in Los Angeles County General’s medical waste incinerator. Why destroy thousands of photos in an incinerator if there was nothing to hide? The LAPD kept hundreds of innocuous crowd scene photos that showed no girl in a polka dot dress or no suspicious activities or individuals. Why were those photos preserved? Perhaps because those photos had nothing in them that warranted their destruction.

While “perhaps” is a mild word, the cover-up of “the girl in the polka dot dress” needs no perhaps. Dozens of people reported seeing a suspicious, curvaceous girl in a white dress with black polka dots with Sirhan in the pantry and other places. She was seen with various other men as well. The evidence for her involvement in the assassination is overwhelming, and yet the LAPD did all in its power to deny this by browbeating witnesses and by allowing her to escape.

Sandra Serrano, a Kennedy campaign worker and a courageous witness, was bullied by the CIA-connected police interrogator Sergeant Enrique “Hank” Hernandez. She had been sitting outside on a metal fire escape getting some air when the polka dot dress girl, accompanied by a man, ran out and down the stairs, shouting, “We’ve shot him, we’ve shot him.” When Serrano asked whom did they shoot, the girl replied, “We’ve shot Senator Kennedy.” Then she and her companion, both of whom Serrano had earlier seen ascending the stairs with Sirhan, disappeared into the night. A little over an hour after the shooting Serrano was interviewed on live television by NBC’s Sander Vanocur where she recounted this. And there were others who saw and heard this girl say the same thing as she and her companion fled the crime scene. Nevertheless, the LAPD, led by Lieutenant Manuel Pena, also CIA affiliated, who was brought out of retirement to run the investigation dubbed “Special Unit Senator,” worked with Hernandez and others to dismiss the girl as of no consequence.

Lisa Pease covers all this and much more. She shows how Sirhan was obviously hypnotized, how the trial was a farce, how the police destroyed evidence from the door frames in the pantry that proved more than the eight bullets in Sirhan’s gun were fired, how Officer DeWayne Wolfer manipulated the ballistic evidence, etc.

Through years of digging into court records, archives, transcripts, the public library, and doing countless interviews, she proves without a doubt that Sirhan did not kill Kennedy and that the assassination and the cover-up were part of a very sophisticated intelligence operation involving many parts and players. She shows how no matter what route Kennedy took in the hotel that night, the killers had all exits covered and that he would not be allowed to leave alive.

While some of her more speculative points – e.g. that Robert Maheu (Howard Hughes/CIA) was “the most credible high-level suspect for the planner of Robert Kennedy’s assassination,” that Kennedy was shot twice in the head from behind, etc. are open to debate, they do not detract from her fundamentally powerful case that RFK, like his brother John, was assassinated by a CIA-run operation intended to silence their voices of courageous resistance to an expanding secret government dedicated to war, murder, and human exploitation. The U.S. government of today.

When Bobby Kennedy was entering the kitchen pantry, he was escorted by a security guard named Thane Eugene Cesar, a man long suspected of being the assassin. Cesar was carrying a gun that he drew but denied firing, despite witnesses’ claims to the contrary. Conveniently, the police never examined the gun. He has long been suspected of being CIA affiliated, and now Pease says she has found evidence to confirm that.

She writes, It’s hard to overstate the significance of finding a current or future CIA contract agent holding Kennedy’s right arm at the moment of the shooting.”

Yes, it is. As she rightly claims, the CIA takeover of America in the 1960s is the story of our time. And our time is now. None of this is ancient history. That is so crucial to grasp. For those who think that learning the truth about the 1960s assassinations is an exercise in futility reserved for those who are living in the past, they need to think again. Our descent into endless war and massive media propaganda to support it is part of a long-term project that began with the elimination of JFK, Malcom X, MLK, and Robert Kennedy. They were killed for reasons, and those reasons still exist, even if they don’t physically, but only in spirit. Their killers roam the land because they have become far more deeply part of the institutional structure of government and the media.

Pease says:


It was horrible that Robert Kennedy was taken from us far too soon. It is horrible that one man has borne the guilt for an operation he neither planned nor willingly participated in. It’s horrible the conspiracy was so obvious that bullets had to be lost and switched to hide it. And it’s horrible that the mainstream media has never dared to tell the people of this country that the government lied to us about what they really found when they looked into this case. Until the media can deal with the truth of the Robert Kennedy assassination, and until the people can be made aware of the CIA’s role in slanting the truth on topics of great importance, America’s very survival is in jeopardy….We’ve come perilously close to losing democracy itself because of fake, CIA-sponsored stories about our history. Should America ever become a dictatorship, the epitaph of our democracy must include the role the mainstream media, by bowing to the National Security state, played in killing it.


By writing A Lie Too Big To Fail, Lisa Pease has done her valiant part in refuting the lie that is now failing. Now it is up to all of us to spread the word of truth by focusing on the fundamental facts so we can finally take back our country from the CIA.


Read more:



Read from top.

more sad news...

Ms Kennedy Hill was the only daughter of Courtney and Paul Michael Hill. Mr Hill is one of four people wrongly convicted of an IRA pub bombing in 1974, who were collectively known as the Guildford Four.

No further details about her death have been released, although US media report she died of an apparent drug overdose. 

The 22-year-old was a communications major at Boston College, according to the New York Times, and had suffered from depression.

"My depression took root in the beginning of my middle school years and will be with me for the rest of my life," she wrote in a student newspaper in 2016.


Read more:


Too many young people go out the wrong way... And there is little we can do. Condolences to the family. 

they don't want him to remember who did it?...

Sirhan Sirhan, the man convicted of assassinating Robert F Kennedy, has been stabbed at a California prison, US media reports say. 

Authorities said a stabbing happened at a prison near San Diego on Friday afternoon.

In a statement, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation said "officers responded quickly" to the attack.

The victim, whose condition is stable, was not named in the statement.

But citing unnamed law enforcement sources, multiple US media reports have identified 75-year-old Sirhan as the victim.

Sirhan is serving a life sentence at the Richard J Donovan Correctional Facility, where the stabbing took place.

The suspected attacker, a fellow inmate, has been placed in isolation, according to TMZ, which first reported the assault

The motive for the attack, which is under investigation, has not been revealed by officials.

Who is Sirhan Sirhan?

Sirhan was convicted of murdering presidential hopeful Kennedy, who he shot three times at the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles on June 5, 1968.

Kennedy was shot in the kitchen of the hotel, shortly after declaring victory in California's Democratic presidential primary to cheering crowds.

The New York senator, brother of former Democratic president John F Kennedy, died in hospital 24 hours later.

He was later buried at Arlington Cemetery, near his brother John, who was assassinated in 1963.

At his trial in 1969, Sirhan was originally sentenced to death. Three years later, however, his sentence was commuted to life in prison when California briefly outlawed capital punishment.

A Palestinian with Jordanian citizenship, Sirhan has claimed he has no recollection of shooting Kennedy.

In a TV interview, Sirhan said he felt betrayed by Kennedy's support for Israel in the 1967 Six-Day War.


Read more:


Read from top....



Read especially: joining some dots...


more dots to join...


“By his own account, Cesar was directly behind my dad holding his right elbow with his own gun drawn when my dad fell backwards on top of him. Cesar repeatedly changed his story about exactly when he drew his weapon…I had plans to meet Cesar in the Philippines last June until he demanded a payment of US$25,000 through his agent Dan Moldea. Ironically, Moldea penned a meticulous and compelling indictment of Cesar in a 1995 book then suddenly exculpated him by fiat in a bizarre and nonsensical final chapter. Police have never seriously investigated Cesar's role in my father’s killing,” he fulminated.

It’s not the first time RFK Jr. has suggested Cesar was responsible for his father’s killing, and he’s not the only member of the Kennedy clan who believes Cesar is responsible for his father's death – he’s previously claimed the LAPD unit that investigated her father’s assassination was run by active CIA operatives, and “destroyed thousands of pieces of evidence”. Moreover, he claimed Sirhan's state-appointed legal representative Grant Cooper was the personal lawyer of mobster Johnny Rosselli, who “ran the assassination program for the CIA against Castro” – Cooper “pressured Sirhan to plead guilty so there was no trial”, he alleged.

Whatever secrets Cesar may have had he evidently took to the grave – and Sirhan can shed no light on the ever-mystifying case either, as beyond his ongoing imprisonment, he’s had no memory of the shooting ever since that fateful day. Most of his self-incriminatory statements were given while he was under hypnosis - although transcripts of the interviews show Sirhan had trouble believing he’d pulled the trigger. 

“My own conscience doesn’t agree with what I did…It’s against my upbringing, my very nature. My childhood, the family, the church, prayers, bibles, and all that, thou shall not kill, and what I’ve tried to conform to as far as the ethics of life or the moralities of life. And here I go and splatter this guy’s brains. It’s just not me. It’s just not me,” he said at one point.

Defence psychiatrists Eric Marcus and Bernard Diamond examined Sirhan, and concluded he suffered from paranoid schizophrenia, and was in a dissociative state at the time of the shooting - a disruption in the normal processes of memory and consciousness – meaning he couldn’t be held criminally responsible for his alleged actions. 

Psychologist and hypnosis expert Dr. Eduard Simson-Kallas went even further – after spending 35 hours interviewing Sirhan at San Quentin Prison in 1969, he alleged Sirhan had been psychologically programmed by persons unknown to commit the murder, that he wasn’t aware or in control of his actions at the time, and his mind was "wiped" in the aftermath by the conspirators so he’d have no memory of the event or of the people who programmed him. 

Critics of Simson-Kallas’ admittedly eyebrow raising theory have suggested he was inspired by The Manchurian Candidate, a then-popular thriller novel in which a US soldier taken prisoner during the Korean War is brainwashed by his captors into becoming a ‘sleeper agent’, and after release reintegrates into US society unaware he’s been primed to carry out an assassination and facilitate the Communist-takeover of the US.

In an extremely curious coincidence, the director of the book’s film adaptation John Frankenheimer became a close friend of Robert F. Kennedy during its creation in 1962, and produced a number of commercials for use in Kennedy’s 1968 presidential campaign. Even more amazingly, it was none other than Frankenheimer who drove Kennedy from Los Angeles Airport to the Ambassador Hotel for his acceptance speech.


Read more:



Read from top.

US conquest of the planet...

from Edward Curtin

There is a vast literature on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, who died on a November 22nd Friday like this in 1963.


I have contributed my small share to such writing in an effort to tell the truth, honor him, and emphasize its profound importance in understanding the history of the last fifty-six years, but more importantly, what is happening in the U.S.A. today.

In other words, to understand it in its most gut-wrenching reality: that the American national security state will obliterate any president that dares to buck its imperial war-making machine. It is a lesson not lost on all presidents since Kennedy.

Unless one is a government disinformation agent or is unaware of the enormous documentary evidence, one knows that it was the CIA that carried out JFK’s murder. Confirmation of this fact keeps arriving in easily accessible forms for anyone interested in the truth. 

A case in point is James DiEugenio’s recent posting at his website, KennedysandKing, of James Wilcott’s affidavit and interrogation by the House Select Committee on Assassinations, declassified by the Assassinations Record Review Board in 1998.

In that document, Wilcott, who worked in the finance department for the CIA and was not questioned by the Warren Commission, discusses how he unwittingly paid Lee Harvey Oswald, the government’s alleged assassin, through a cryptonym and how it was widely known and celebrated at his CIA station in Tokyo that the CIA killed Kennedy and Oswald worked for the Agency, although he did not shoot JFK.

I highly recommend reading the document.

I do not here want to go into any further analysis or debate about the case.  I think the evidence is overwhelming that the President was murdered by the national security state. Why he was murdered, and the implications for today, are what concern me.


Read more:



Read from top.

when presidents do not control their dogs...

by Cynthia Chung



There is no instance of a nation benefitting from prolonged warfare.”
Sun Tzu

On January 20th, 1961, John F. Kennedy was inaugurated as President of the United States. Along with inheriting the responsibility of the welfare of the country and its people, he was to also inherit a secret war with communist Cuba run by the CIA.

JFK was disliked from the onset by the CIA and certain corridors of the Pentagon, they knew where he stood on foreign matters and that it would be in direct conflict for what they had been working towards for nearly 15 years. 

Kennedy would inherit the CIA secret operation against Cuba, which Prouty confirms in his book, was quietly upgraded by the CIA from the Eisenhower administration’s March 1960 approval of a modest Cuban-exile support program (which included small air drop and over-the-beach operations) to a 3,000 man invasion brigade just before Kennedy entered office.

This was a massive change in plans that was determined by neither President Eisenhower, who warned at the end of his term of the military industrial complex as a loose cannon, nor President Kennedy, but rather the foreign intelligence bureau who has never been subject to election or judgement by the people. 

It shows the level of hostility that Kennedy encountered as soon as he entered office, and the limitations of a President’s power when he does not hold support from these intelligence and military quarters.

Within three months into JFK’s term, Operation Bay of Pigs (April 17th to 20th 1961) was scheduled. As the popular revisionist history goes; JFK refused to provide air cover for the exiled Cuban brigade and the land invasion was a calamitous failure and a decisive victory for Castro’s Cuba. 

It was indeed an embarrassment for President Kennedy who had to take public responsibility for the failure, however, it was not an embarrassment because of his questionable competence as a leader. It was an embarrassment because, had he not taken public responsibility, he would have had to explain the real reason why it failed. 

That the CIA and military were against him and that he did not have control over them. 

If Kennedy were to admit such a thing, he would have lost all credibility as a President in his own country and internationally, and would have put the people of the United States in immediate danger amidst a Cold War.

What really occurred was that there was a cancellation of the essential pre-dawn airstrike, by the Cuban Exile Brigade bombers from Nicaragua, to destroy Castro’s last three combat jets. This airstrike was ordered by Kennedy himself. 

Kennedy was always against an American invasion of Cuba, and striking Castro’s last jets by the Cuban Exile Brigade would have limited Castro’s threat, without the U.S. directly supporting a regime change operation within Cuba. This went fully against the CIA’s plan for Cuba.

Kennedy’s order for the airstrike on Castro’s jets would be cancelled by Special Assistant for National Security Affairs McGeorge Bundy, four hours before the Exile Brigade’s B-26s were to take off from Nicaragua, Kennedy was not brought into this decision. 

In addition, the Director of Central Intelligence Allen Dulles, the man in charge of the Bay of Pigs operation was unbelievably out of the country on the day of the landings.

Col. Prouty, who was Chief of Special Operations during this time, elaborates on this situation:

Everyone connected with the planning of the Bay of Pigs invasion knew that the policy dictated by NSC 5412, positively prohibited the utilization of active-duty military personnel in covert operations. At no time was an “air cover” position written into the official invasion plan…The “air cover” story that has been created is incorrect.”

As a result, JFK who well understood the source of this fiasco, set up a Cuban Study Group the day after and charged it with the responsibility of determining the cause for the failure of the operation. The study group, consisting of Allen Dulles, Gen. Maxwell Taylor, Adm. Arleigh Burke and Attorney General Robert Kennedy (the only member JFK could trust), concluded that the failure was due to Bundy’s telephone call to General Cabell (who was also CIA Deputy Director) that cancelled the President’s air strike order.

Kennedy had them.

Humiliatingly, CIA Director Allen Dulles was part of formulating the conclusion that the Bay of Pigs op was a failure because of the CIA’s intervention into the President’s orders. This allowed for Kennedy to issue the National Security Action Memorandum #55 on June 28th, 1961, which began the process of changing the responsibility from the CIA to the Joint Chiefs of Staff. 

As Prouty states, “When fully implemented, as Kennedy had planned, after his reelection in 1964, it would have taken the CIA out of the covert operation business. This proved to be one of the first nails in John F. Kennedy’s coffin.”

If this was not enough of a slap in the face to the CIA, Kennedy forced the resignation of CIA Director Allen Dulles, CIA Deputy Director for Plans Richard M. Bissell Jr. and CIA Deputy Director Charles Cabell.

In Oct 1962, Kennedy was informed that Cuba had offensive Soviet missiles 90 miles from American shores. Soviet ships with more missiles were on their way towards Cuba but ended up turning around last minute. 

Rumours started to abound that JFK had cut a secret deal with Russian Premier Khrushchev, which was that the U.S. would not invade Cuba if the Soviets withdrew their missiles. Criticisms of JFK being soft on communism began to stir.

NSAM #263, closely overseen by Kennedy, was released on Oct 11th, 1963, and outlined a policy decision “to withdraw 1,000 military personnel [from Vietnam] by the end of 1963” and further stated that “It should be possible to withdraw the bulk of U.S. personnel [including the CIA and military] by 1965.” The Armed Forces newspaper Stars and Stripes had the headline U.S. TROOPS SEEN OUT OF VIET BY ’65. Kennedy was winning the game and the American people.

This was to be the final nail in Kennedy’s coffin.

Kennedy was brutally shot down only one month later, on Nov, 22nd 1963. His death should not just be seen as a tragic loss but, more importantly, it should be recognised for the successful military coup d’état that it was and is. The CIA showed what lengths it was ready to go to if a President stood in its way. (For more information on this coup refer to District Attorney of New Orleans at the time, Jim Garrison’s book. And the excellently researched Oliver Stone movie “JFK”)


On Nov. 26th 1963, a full four days after Kennedy’s murder, de facto President Johnson signed NSAM #273 to begin the change of Kennedy’s policy under #263. And on March 4th, 1964, Johnson signed NSAM #288 that marked the full escalation of the Vietnam War and involved 2,709,918 Americans directly serving in Vietnam, with 9,087,000 serving with the U.S. Armed Forces during this period.

The Vietnam War, or more accurately the Indochina War, would continue for another 12 years after Kennedy’s death, lasting a total of 20 years for Americans.

Scattered black ops wars continued, but the next large scale-never ending war that would involve the world would begin full force on Sept 11, 2001 under the laughable title War on Terror, which is basically another Iron Curtain, a continuation of a 74 year Cold War. A war that is not meant to end until the ultimate regime changes are accomplished and the world sees the toppling of Russia and China. 

Iraq was destined for invasion long before the vague Gulf War of 1990 and even before Saddam Hussein was being backed by the Americans in the Iraq-Iran war in the 1980s. Iran already suffered a CIA backed regime change in 1979.

It had been understood far in advance by the CIA and US military that the toppling of sovereignty in Iraq, Libya, Syria and Iran needed to occur before Russia and China could be taken over. Such war tactics were formulaic after 3 decades of counterinsurgency against the CIA fueled “communist-insurgency” of Indochina. 

This is how today’s terrorist-inspired insurgency functions, as a perfect CIA formula for an endless bloodbath.

Former CIA Deputy Director (2010-2013) Michael Morell, who was supporting Hillary Clinton during the presidential election campaign and vehemently against the election of Trump, whom he claimed was being manipulated by Putin, said in a 2016 interview with Charlie Rose that Russians and Iranians in Syria should be killed covertly to ‘pay the price’.

Therefore, when a drone stroke occurs assassinating an Iranian Maj. Gen., even if the U.S. President takes onus on it, I would not be so quick as to believe that that is necessarily the case, or the full story.

Just as I would not take the statements of President Rouhani accepting responsibility for the Iranian military shooting down ‘by accident’ the Boeing 737-800 plane which contained 176 civilians, who were mostly Iranian, as something that can be relegated to criminal negligence, but rather that there is very likely something else going on here.

I would also not be quick to dismiss the timely release, or better described as leaked, draft letter from the US Command in Baghdad to the Iraqi government that suggests a removal of American forces from the country. Its timing certainly puts the President in a compromised situation. Though the decision to keep the American forces within Iraq or not is hardly a simple matter that the President alone can determine. In fact there is no reason why, after reviewing the case of JFK, we should think such a thing.


Read more:




Read from top.

the song about JFK's murder...

From Edward Curtin


Imagine this: A so-called presidential historian for a major television network publishes an interview in the most famous newspaper in the world with the most famous singer/songwriter in the world, who has recently written an explosive song accusing the U.S. government of a conspiracy in the assassination of the most famous modern American president, and the interviewer never asks the singer about the specific allegations in his song except to ask him if he was surprised that the song reached number one on the Billboard hit list and other musical and cultural references that have nothing to do with the assassination.

Imagine no more.

For that is exactly what Douglas Brinkley, CNN’s presidential historian, has just done with his June 12, 2020 interview with Bob Dylan in The New York Times. 

The interview makes emphatically clear that Brinkley is not in the least interested in what Dylan has to say about the assassination of the President of the United States, John F. Kennedy, whose murder most foul marks in the most profound way possible the devolution of the U.S. into the cesspool it has become. Brinkley has another agenda.

He introduces the interview by sketching in his relationship with Dylan and tells us that he therefore felt “comfortable” reaching out to him in April after Dylan had released his song about the JFK assassination,“Murder Most Foul.”

He conveniently links to a New York Times piece by John Pareles wherein Pareles writes about the surprise song release:

The assassination of John F. Kennedy is its core and central trauma — “the soul of a nation been torn away/and it’s beginnin’ to go into a slow decay” — while Dylan tries to find answers, or at least clues, in music.”


That is simply false – for Dylan emphatically does not try to find answers or clues to JFK’s murder, but boldly states his answer. If you listen to his piercing voice and follow the lyrics closely, you might be startled to be told, not from someone who can be dismissed as some sort of disgruntled “conspiracy nut,” but by the most famous musician in the world, that there was a government conspiracy to kill JFK, that Oswald didn’t do it, and that the killers then went for the president’s brothers.

But neither Pareles or the presidential historian interviewer Brinkley has any interest in Dylan’s answer. As I wrote five days after the song’s release, it was already clear that the corporate mainstream media were in the process of diverting readers from the core of Dylan’s message:

While the song’s release has garnered massive publicity from the mainstream media, it hasn’t taken long for that media to bury the truth of his words about the assassination under a spectacle of verbiage meant to damn with faint praise. As the media in a celebrity culture of the spectacle tend to do, the emphasis on the song’s pop cultural references is their focus, with platitudes about the assassination and “conspiracy theories,” as well as various shameful and gratuitous digs at Dylan for being weird, obsessed, or old. As the song says, “they killed him once and they killed him twice,” so now they can kill him a third time, and then a fourth ad infinitum. And now the messenger of the very bad news must be dispatched along with the dead president.


Brinkley continues this coverup under the guise of promoting Dylan’s upcoming album, Rough and Rowdy Ways, while showing his appreciation for Dylan’s music and his genius and asking questions that emphasize cultural and musical allusions in the new album, and making certain to not allow Dylan’s explosive message any breathing room.


Read more:



Read from top.

the bullshit from james woolsey ....


KGB general says why Lee Harvey Oswald did not kill John F. Kennedy


KGB General Nikolai Leonov, who personally knew Lee Harvey Oswald, talks about the version of John F. Kennedy's assassination on the orders from Nikita Khrushchev.



The Warren Commission report

The New York Post, in an article dated from February 22, briefly describes the contents of the book "Inside the Kremlin's Secret War on America" ​​by James Woolsey, who served as CIA Director from 1993 to 1995, and Ion Mihai Pacepa, Lieutenant General and former acting Securitate, the secret police of Communist Romania, who died, as the newspaper noted, from COVID in early February.

The authors claim that Lee Harvey Oswald was a KGB officer whom Nikita Khrushchev gave a personal order to assassinate US President John F. Kennedy. However, the KGB, fearing a nuclear war with the United States, supposedly reconvinced Khrushchev, and the order was withdrawn. Nevertheless, Oswald "being blindly devoted to the USSR", still implemented the original plan.

The evidence substantiating this version, as the authors say, is contained in the 26-volume report from the Warren Commission (which investigated the assassination), but most of it was "codified", which made it hard to understand. 

According to Woolsey and Pacepa, the KGB recruited Oswald in 1957 when he served in the United States Marine Corps in Japan. It was him who transmitted the information that gave the USSR an opportunity to shoot down US pilot Gary Powers in 1960. In 1962, he was instructed, perhaps by Nikita Khrushchev himself, to start preparations for the assassination of President Kennedy.


"He (Oswald) was given a Soviet wife and sent back to the United States in June 1962," but in 1963, the KGB and [the country's] leadership realized that Khrushchev's crazy ideas were creating a terrible reputation for the USSR, and feeling a nuclear war.

The authors, who "uncoded" the data from the Warren Commission Report, came to conclusion that Oswald had secretly met in Mexico City with Soviet agent "Comrade Kostikov," who was a member of the department for the Investigation of murders committed abroad." 

The assignment was eventually withdrawn, but Oswald wanted to make the plan real. 

In fact, all the "evidence" supporting the new version comes down to Oswald's letters.

In one of them, dated from July 1, 1963, Oswald asked the Soviet embassy to issue separate visas for him, his wife and daughters, which, according to Woolsey and Pacepa, speaks of Oswald's efforts to escape after the assassination attempt. Another letter, dated from November 9 of the same year - just two weeks before Kennedy's assassination - was written after Oswald returned from a trip to Mexico City. In the letter, Oswald referred to the meeting with "Comrade Kostikov", whom the authors call "Valery Kostikov, an officer of the 13th Department of the First Chief Directorate of the KGB."

JFK was killed by US hawks

In a comment for Pravda.Ru, Nikolai Leonov, retired KGB lieutenant general, ex-deputy head of the foreign intelligence department of the KGB, Doctor of Historical Sciences, professor of the MGIMO (Moscow State Institute for Foreign Relations) Department for Diplomacy, said that the conclusions that Woolsey and Pacepa came to in their book were "nonsense."

Nikolai Leonov confirmed Oswald's visit to the Soviet embassy in Mexico "a month before Kennedy's assassination" and his personal conversation with him, in which the American indeed asked for political asylum in the USSR. However, the context of those actions was completely different from the version of US "researchers."

"In a personal conversation with me, Oswald frankly admitted that he had no personal claims or hostility towards the US president. Therefore, Oswald had absolutely no political interest in assassinating Kennedy," Nikolai Leonov said.

However, according to the former intelligence officer, Oswald was "clearly concerned" by the constant surveillance and searches of his hotel room by "unknown people who were following him from the United States." He had to carry a gun around to be able to take self-defense measures against those people.

"I personally had to make a lot of efforts to talk him out of such terrorist intentions, to calm him down and walk him out of the territory of the Soviet embassy. He clearly gave the impression of a mentally unbalanced person. The purpose of his visit to our embassy and meeting, in this case, with me (I was then the third secretary in the embassy) was based on his desire to go back to the Soviet Union, and as soon as possible," said Nikolai Leonov.

According to Leonov, Oswald feared for his life. He found the procedure to return to the Soviet Union very complicated, because one had to write an application to the Presidium of the Supreme Council. "He got a little worried and said that we were bureaucrats, so he would look for another option to go to another country."

Kennedy was too soft with Cuba

The expert is convinced that Kennedy was killed by people "who took revenge on the president for being soft towards Cuba during the missile crisis and not agreeing to strike Havana."

Robert Strange McNamara (Kennedy's Secretary of Defense) shares the same point of view. Nikolai Leonov met McNamara in Cuba in 2004 as part of the conference devoted to the results of the missile crisis.

"McNamara clearly told us that 70 percent of people around Kennedy wanted him to strike in Cuba. McNamara, as well as about 30 percent of the White House staff were strongly opposed to attacking Cuba to avoid the breakout of the nuclear missile war," Nikolai Leonov said.

"McNamara told the president that no one could guarantee that Soviet atomic bombs would not fall on the territory of the United States. Kennedy said that he did not want to be the first president of the United States who would start a nuclear war from a nuclear attack on the United States. What was the point in hiring Oswald to assassinate Kennedy? He was a sick man," the expert noted.

As for Nikita Khrushchev, with whom Nikolai Leonov worked as a translator from Spanish, neither him nor the Soviet leadership "even thought of dealing with terror of that level."

"This is total BS what they are inventing again now. They blame everything on Russia. The fear that the Soviet Union instilled in them does not let them live quietly. I would ask American authors to stop making up those stories. This is nothing but gossip invented for the Cold War to continue," Nikolai Leonov said.

Читайте больше на



Read from top.

accessible to the people...

On Nov. 18, 1963, in the midst of a whirlwind campaign trip, President John F. Kennedy told Secret Service supervisor Floyd Boring that agents riding on special boards installed near the trunk of his car should drop back and tail him from a follow-up vehicle instead. 

“It’s excessive, Floyd. And it’s giving the wrong impression to people,” said Kennedy. “We’ve got an election coming up. The whole point is for me to be accessible to the people.” 

Kennedy’s bristling at the proximity of the agents was not uncommon for those being protected by the Secret Service, especially US presidents. But after his assassination four days later, some agents wondered if that extra car-length prevented them from saving JFK’s life

“Zero Fail: The Rise and Fall of the Secret Service,” by Washington Post reporter Carol Leonnig (Random House, out May 18), recounts presidential history from the service’s point of view, documenting how inadequate budgets, resistant protectees, political infighting and a macho, frat-boy culture have often left the agents ill-prepared for their vital, lifesaving missions. 

In the case of JFK, his personal charisma — most effective when he could interact directly with the public — and his frequent dalliances with young women made him a special challenge. 

“In private, Kennedy’s Secret Service agents saw a man courting danger,” Leonnig writes. 

“Kennedy was extremely reckless with his own personal safety. His actions made some of his protectors uneasy and a few quite angry. Professionally, he was their toughest assignment yet.” 

Kennedy, capitalizing on his telegenic appeal, broke all records for presidential trips outside the White House immediately upon taking office in 1961. 

At the time, the White House’s Secret Service detail had only 34 agents, working in six-man teams in rotating eight-hour shifts. 

In order to cover the president’s blazing schedule, the agents worked double-shifts and on their days off, often forgoing a night’s sleep. 





Drinking liquor on the road was forbidden, since agents “could be called for duty at any time when the president was traveling,” but this rule was widely ignored. 

The Cellar had no liquor license, but the owners served a free concoction of fruit juice and grain alcohol that they kept behind the bar. 

The agents returned to their hotel between 2:45 a.m. and 5 a.m. The day shift began at 8 a.m. 

As they drove through Dallas several hours later, agents who would normally be riding by the president’s side were a car-length behind him instead. 

Clint Hill, head of the first lady’s detail, was riding in the follow car instead of in his usual spot next to her lady. He appeared to be the only agent who heard the first shot and immediately realized what had happened, seeing the president “raise his hands to either side of his throat.” 

“I knew I should have been on the back of that car!” Hill thought. His body could have kept the assassin from getting a clear shot,” Leonnig writes, noting that the other agents heard the shot, but were initially confused about the source and the target. 

Bill Greer, the driver, thought a motorcycle had backfired and reflexively slowed the car down, inadvertently giving Lee Harvey Oswald an easier target for his next two shots. The third shot connected with the right side of the president’s head. 

In the ensuing chaos, a shocked Jackie Kennedy “stretched her torso and right arm out over the car’s trunk. She reached out to retrieve something on the shiny black metal of the trunk’s lid — a small chunk of her husband’s brain and skull.” The first lady would keep that in her hand until she could give it to the surgeon. 


Read more:




Here, some of the narrative is not as accurate as it should be in regard to the final shot. It is quite self-serving to promote the "official version" of the Assassination of JFK, that the NYO chose this secret service story out of many (I guess)... Read from top...





new conspiracy theory....


The death of America’s eternal sex symbol Marilyn Monroe is covered in mystery. Despite being ruled a suicide, the star’s alleged intimate connection to late President John F. Kennedy and his brother Bobby is still sparking rumours about her unexpected passing at the age of 36.

Marilyn Monroe was poisoned by JFK’s brother Bobby Kennedy with a top-secret drug invented by the CIA in a bid to prevent her from going public about her affairs with the two brothers, claims former detective Mike Rothmiller.

It has been officially assumed that the blonde bombshell, who had a history of overdoses and depression, killed herself with barbiturates on the evening of 4 August 1962. Despite a string of rumours about her intimate connection to John F. Kennedy after her sparkling “Happy Birthday, Mr. President” performance at Madison Square Garden, it has never been confirmed that the two had an affair and only one genuine photo of them together exists.

However, according to Rothmiller’s upcoming book ‘Bombshell: The Night Bobby Kennedy Killed Marilyn Monroe’, he came across secret police dossiers in the Los Angeles Police Department intelligence archives in 1978, which revealed evidence that the legendary singer and actress was murdered by the US Attorney General and the police had chosen to cover this up.

Speaking to the Sun Online ahead of the book’s release, Rothmiller’s unveiled what dark secrets he found during his work at the LAPD’s Organised Crime Intelligence Division.

“When I went into that unit I had no idea what was in there, nobody in the police department does except the guys who work there and the Chief of Police,” the former detective told The Sun.

“There were files on three Kennedys – the President, the Attorney General and their brother Edward. Those files were linked to others, just like a huge spider’s web.”


Read more:


Read from top..





Former CIA officer and author Robert Baer, who led the investigation in History’s “JFK Declassified: Tracking Oswald” program, believes the biggest revelation to come out of the newest file release is that the White House and intelligence agencies are continuing to conceal all that was known about Lee Harvey Oswald before the assassination, and how much information was withheld from the official investigation into the events of November 22, 1963.

“They’ve had 25 years to redact and protect sources and methods,” Baer says. “What they’re covering up…is the actual cover-up on Oswald, and there was one. I have seen no evidence that there’s any sort of government conspiracy, but the cover-up—withholding from the Warren Commission, destroying documentation—it’s just there. It’s undisputed.”

Baer hasn’t had a chance to review all the newly released documents, but he believes many of the most important documents, and eyewitnesses, related to Oswald’s plot to kill Kennedy will never be made public. These include information about Oswald’s known connections with Cuban exiles in Dallas, who
may have known of his assassination plans and sent word back to Havana, as well as interviews with a key eyewitness at the Cuban consulate, where Oswald reportedly bragged openly about his plans to kill the U.S. president.

If the full trove of government records related to JFK’s assassination were ever to be made public, Baer has an idea of what they would show. “I think what happened, without seeing all the documents, is that the assassination could have been stopped,” Baer says. “The Secret Service should have been informed, Oswald should have been confronted before Kennedy’s visit…It could have been stopped.” He believes “once the government understood this [was preventable], they closed down the investigation.”

“It’s not what the conspiracy theorists think—the guy with the black umbrella, the shooter on the grassy knoll,” Baer says. “The crime is the cover-up.”


Read more:


Why Gus's interest in this? Yesterday, I saw some old NEWS footage from 1963 in regard to the assassination, that claimed that the "Secret Service had searched all buildings and premises around the Presidential route BEFORE the visit by Kennedy — EXCEPT THE PLACE WHERE OSWALD took his shots from..." Read from top. My guess is that the secret service did not take chances. They had their fall guy set up, while the bullet that blew JFK's brain out came from a secret service AK15. The fall guy, Oswald, was caught and eliminated, leaving no way for him to spill the beans on how he came to "do the deed"... And when Ruby was about to talk about his own shooting of Oswald, he died from "cancer". No outside loose ends... Still, the "unofficial" true version is classified. 


Free Julian Assange Now µµµµµµµµµµµµµµµµ˜

stone upturned...


Oliver Stone’s new JFK assassination doc is being ignored by the MSM… a sure sign he might be onto something


The establishment media is celebrating odd, sexually charged movies at the Cannes Film Festival – yet won’t even acknowledge Oliver Stone’s foray back into the troubling case of President John F. Kennedy’s murder. I wonder why?

Last week, Oliver Stone premiered his new documentary about the Kennedy assassination titled ‘JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass’, at the Cannes festival.  

You’d think that Stone, the polarizing, two-time Best Director Academy Award winner, whose filmJFKcreated such a furor it led to the US government passing the JFK Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992, premiering a controversial JFK assassination documentary at Cannes would be very big news. You’d be wrong.


When ‘JFK: Revisited’ premiered on Monday, July 12, the mainstream media didn’t praise it or pan it. They pretended it didn’t exist. 

The New York Times’ vast coverage of Cannes consisted of 11 articles, most focusing on the more salacious content, such as ‘Benedetta’, a steamy story about lesbian nuns, ‘Annette’, a musical where Adam Driver sings while performing oral sex on Marion Cotillard, and ‘Titane’, where a woman has sex with a car and lactates oil. But not once has ‘JFK Revisited’ been mentioned in the supposed ‘paper of record’. 

The same is true of the Washington Post, Boston Globe, LA Times, Chicago Tribune, the Guardian, the Atlantic, the New Yorker and every mainstream outlet I searched, as none of them acknowledge ‘JFK Revisited’exists at all.  

The only media mentions I found were in trade papers likeVariety and the Hollywood Reporter, and in the British press, in the Times and Daily Telegraph. Their reaction to the film was split, with Variety and The Times giving negative reviews and THR and the Daily Telegraph praising it. 

Considering that Cuba, intelligence agency nefariousness, and conspiracy theories are making headlines, and that the small critical assessment of the documentary is split, it’s curious that the media is maintaining the status quo by endorsing sexual depravity at Cannes instead of pursuing truth by debating ‘JFK Revisited’.  

I’m kidding, of course. It’s no surprise that the American myth-making media who bequeath to us the official narrative from which ‘respectable’ people will never deviate, are tossing ‘JFK Revisited’ down the memory hole and lavishing praise on horny nuns and coital Cadillacs.

You see, the establishment loves to distract the masses and hate conspiracies – except for the ones they love.


JFK assassination conspiracies are rejected outright as unserious, despite a plethora of damningevidence, because they indict the establishment itself. Half of the talking heads on cable news are former (wink-wink) intelligence community members, and the vast majority of journalists are lapdogs for the intel agencies, so they’re not going to bite the hand that feeds them in service to the truth about the JFK assassination. 

This same anti-conspiratorial press spent four years breathlessly belching up every half-assed Russia conspiracy story they could conjure – including Russiagate, claims of Russia using microwave weapons or hacking into power grids and voting machines – and shouted them from the rooftops 24/7 until they become presumed true despite a complete lack of evidence.  

As Noam Chomsky would say, this is how deceptive propaganda is effectively disseminated and consent is manufactured, through “controlled market forces, internalized assumptions and self-censorship.” 

‘Serious’ people prove their seriousness by believing those absurd officially sanctioned anti-Russia conspiracies because they are deemed ‘serious’ and are propagated by other ‘serious’ people, while ‘unserious’ conspiracies like JFK and the Wuhan lab leak theory are ridiculed, and those believing them demeaned as ‘conspiracy theorists’. 

This is why the establishment loathes Stone so much, because he flipped the script in ’91 by using his considerable cache in the wake of his massive Hollywood success to make a movie about the JFK assassination that obliterated the official account of the Warren Commission and presented a compelling counter-argument.

To get a taste of how much the establishment despises Stone, go read his ‘JFK: The Book of the Film’, which features 97 reactions and commentaries about the movie. 

Unlike his adversaries, Stone prints those who disagree with him, as evidenced by articles featured in the book such as ‘Does JFK conspire against reason?’ ‘Hollywood Wonders if Warner Brothers Let JFK Go Too Far’, ‘Oliver’s Twist’, ‘The Paranoid Style’ and ‘The Plot to Assassinate the Warren Commission’, to name but a few. 

The hysteria that ‘JFK’ triggered among the elites in ’91 is perfectly encapsulated in a tale told by the late film critic Roger Ebert, who claimed Walter Cronkite gave him a “tongue-lashing” and said he should be “ashamed” of himself for praising the movie.


Stone became more of an establishment pariah when he interviewed Fidel Castro in 2002 and Russian President Vladimir Putin between 2015 and 2017. Stone spoke with America’s enemies instead of just mouthing the mindless official mantra, an unforgivable sin in the eyes of the media who believe there’s only one narrative, and we can’t complicate it by listening instead of yelling.

Stone’s history of being a firebrand, and his loyalty to truth above the official narrative, is why ‘JFK Revisited’ is being intentionally ignored. Any press is good press; even a bad review spreads awareness of the product, so hitting the ignore button is the best way for the establishment to silence Stone and maintain the JFK status quo. 

And thus far the media blackout is working as intended, as ‘JFK Revisited’ has yet to secure a distributor here in the American market which is desperately hungry for content.

I haven’t seen ‘JFK Revisited’, so I have no idea if it tells the truth regarding the JFK assassination. But I do know that the establishment media is addicted to lies and allergic to truth, which makes me think Stone might be onto something.


Read more:


Read from top



still hiding the truth?...

PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN will soon decide an obscure but potent question: Which secret files related to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy should be made fully public?

When President Donald Trump faced the same decision four years ago, he delayed in the name of national security. While releasing thousands of files about the 1963 Kennedy assassination, Trump acquiesced to the demand of CIA Director Mike Pompeo to keep portions of thousands more secret until October 2021, 58 years after Lee Harvey Oswald was arrested as the gunman. For all his “deep state” rhetoric, Trump issued a memo giving the executive branch agencies four more years of secrecy.

Will Biden follow the law? The JFK Records Act, passed unanimously by Congress in 1992, called for “expeditious public transmission” of all JFK files into the public record. Twenty-nine years later, the intent of Congress has been effectively nullified by the demands of federal agencies, particularly the CIA, which is responsible for 70 percent of the withheld records. The National Archives website says 15,834 JFK files which have been released remain redacted, though some redactions involve only a single word.

Kennedy was shot dead as his motorcade passed through downtown Dallas on November 22, 1963. Oswald, a 24-year-old leftist, was arrested 90 minutes later. He denied shooting Kennedy, claiming he was a “patsy.” The next day Oswald was shot dead on national TV by Jack Ruby, a nightclub owner with organized crime connections. The causes of Kennedy’s death have been debated ever since.

Federal Judge John Tunheim, chair of the civilian review board which declassified more than 300,000 JFK documents in the 1990s, called on Biden to release the JFK files without exception. “Why keep on holding back stuff?” Tunheim told The Intercept. “I don’t think there is any reason to protect any of it.”

What’s in the files?

The most sensitive JFK secrets involve U.S. operations against Cuba in 1963. Oswald was a public supporter of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, or FPCC, a popular campus group which defended Fidel Castro’s government from aggressive U.S. policies. Records declassified in the 1990s revealed that the CIA targeted the FPCC for disruption in September 1963. Within the records that have been partially released, propaganda sources, deception methods, and surveillance techniques are often redacted.

One passage in a file on Operation Northwoods, a top-secret Pentagon operation that aimed to provoke a U.S. invasion of Cuba, is still off-limits to the public. Approved by the Joint Chiefs of Staff in May 1963, the Northwoods plans envisioned an “engineered provocation” to replace Cuba’s socialist government with a pro-American regime. Northwoods called for the “the most trusted covert personnel” to stage a spectacular crime on a U.S. target and arrange for the blame to fall on Castro, so as to create a “justification for U.S. intervention in Cuba.” The Northwood plans were discovered by the Assassination Records Review Board in 1997. Two paragraphs of the 200-page document remain classified in 2021.

Other files that have not been fully released include the following:

  • The surveillance techniques that detected Oswald’s visits to the Cuban and Soviet embassies in Mexico City six weeks before Kennedy was killed are redacted in this 1963 memo and this internal CIA history.
  • Within hours of Kennedy’s assassination, CIA propaganda assets funded under a secret program called AMSPELL generated press reports linking Oswald to the FPCC, with the implication that Castro was behind the president’s murder. One 86-page AMSPELL file from 1964 contains 15 pages of redacted material.
  • The personnel file of George Joannides, a Miami-based undercover officer who guided and monitored the AMSPELL agents in 1963, is heavily redacted. In 2018, a U.S. Court of Appeals panel upheld the CIA’s rejection of the Freedom of Information Act request for Joannides’s files.
  • Another heavily censored file documents the AMLASH conspiracy, a CIA plot to kill Castro that failed, though not for lack of trying. The file runs to 232 pages with scores of redactions. The AMLASH plot became a focus of the JFK investigators in 1975 when it was revealed that a CIA officer had passed a lethal weapon to Castro’s would-be assassin on the day JFK was killed.
  • Some CIA files relate to propaganda operations inside the United States, nominally forbidden by the agency’s charter. A history of the Miami station is heavily redacted. So is the 1975 testimony of an undercover officer who described CIA activities in south Florida and New Orleans, including the use of “prominent newspaper officials in the Miami area.”

There are scores of similar erasures in the JFK files that illuminate how the letter and spirit of the JFK Records Act is being flouted by extreme claims of secrecy. The information withheld hardly seems earth-shaking, but the full significance of the last of the JFK files can only be assessed after full disclosure. Biden’s decision is expected on October 26.


Read more:


Read from top.



more JFK delays...

John F. Kennedy's nephews are slamming the Biden administration's decision to push back the scheduled release of JFK assassination records that remain sealed until late 2022. Kennedy family members say the secrecy needs to end.


The White House released a memorandum on Friday announcing that it would delay information in certain records related to the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy — a publication that was scheduled to be released this Tuesday.


The memo explains the continued postponement under statutory standard and the possibility of a longer postponement if the Biden administration deemed it necessary.

“It’s an outrage. It’s an outrage against American democracy. We’re not supposed to have secret governments within the government,” Robert F. Kennedy Jr. reportedly told POLITICO.


“How the hell is it 58 years later, and what in the world could justify not releasing these documents?”


Kennedy Jr.’s cousin, former US Representative from Rhode Island Patrick Kennedy, also criticized the decision, saying that the records should be released not because of his family, but because American citizens have a right to know about “something that left such a scar in this nation’s soul that lost not only a president but a promise of a brighter future.”


Read more:



Read from top...



Why the end of 2022?. Easy. Releasing the documents before the mid-term election could and would damage the chances of the DEMOCRAT PARTY... 



FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

we'd be lucky to see the files by 2032...


The Oscar-winning director told Afshin Rattansi how he was baffled by President Joe Biden’s decision to once again postpone the release of classified files on the assassination of the 35th president, John F. Kennedy, in 1963.

A White House memo written last month alleged that, because of the Covid-19 pandemic, the National Archives and other agencies needed “additional time” to prepare the Kennedy files for publication. The release of the documents was delayed until December 15, 2022.

“That was the official reason. I don’t know how that applies because I don’t know why you can’t read or think while you have Covid,” Stone told the host of RT’s ‘Going Underground’.

Former President Donald Trump released around 19,000 declassified documents, many of them with redactions, from the JFK case in 2018. However, others were withheld on the grounds of national security. 


'I don't know how that applies because I don't know why you can't read or think while you have makes me cry'@TheOliverStone on Biden blocking the release of classified JFK papers, citing COVID-19 as the reasonWEDNESDAY ON GUDon't miss it:

— Going Underground on RT (@Underground_RT) November 23, 2021

“Not only he backed down at the last second and refused to release roughly 20,000 documents that we’re interested in,” Stone said of Trump. “He illegally added a step: he said that the next time the National Archive had to be also consulted. It was originally a decision made by Congress that the president was the last one to say anything to stop [the publication].”

Stone’s new documentary, ‘JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass,’ premiered at the Cannes Film Festival last summer. Stone told Rattansi in July that Kennedy may have been killed in “a very organized black op” for his anti-colonial policies and desire to end the Cold War.

Watch the full interview on on Wednesday.



Read more:







JFK and mossad.....

Edward Curtin wrote four years ago on Counter-Currents:

perhaps no one epitomized the twisted mind games played by intelligence agencies more than James Jesus Angleton, the notorious CIA Counterintelligence Chief for so many years, in whose safe were found gruesome photos of Robert Kennedy’s autopsy. Why, one may ask, were those photos there, since Angleton allegedly had no connection to the RFK killing and since Sirhan was said to be the assassin? Was Angleton’s work as CIA liaison with Israel in any way connected?

If you ask me, I strongly suspect it was. Angleton had been the Mossad’s indispensable ally in John Kennedy’s assassination. So he had personal reasons to cooperate with them again in stopping Robert Kennedy from reaching the White House, a position from which, according to multiple testimonies, Robert intended to track his brother’s assassins.[1]

I summarized the case against Ben-Gurion’s Israel in the assassinations of both Kennedy brothers in this article, which still turns up regularly among The Unz Review’s “Past classics”. Here I’ll try to show that an inquiry into Angleton’s “wilderness of mirrors” makes the case even stronger.

The “World War III” Virus

Angleton’s name often comes up in books incriminating the CIA in the 1963 Dallas coup, because he is believed to have engineered the staged visits and telephone calls by an Oswald impersonator to both the Soviet and Cuban embassies in Mexico City in late September and early October 1963. Over the phone, this bogus “Oswald” referred to an arrangement with Vladimir Kostikov, who was known to the FBI as the officer in charge of assassinations in the United States. These visits and calls were, of course, monitored by the local CIA cell, and would constitute, after November 22, evidence of a Cuban-Soviet conspiracy.

According to the most natural and common interpretation, the purpose of staging Oswald as a communist conspirator was to blame the Dallas shooting on Cuba and/or the Soviet Union — a classic false flag scenario. Besides getting rid of Kennedy, the theory goes, the motive was to create a pretext for invading Cuba, something that Kennedy had forbidden after the Bay of Pigs debacle and the firing of Allen Dulles. That has become the dominant JFK conspiracy theory, best articulated recently by James Douglass. But it has one major flaw: there was no invasion of Cuba following Kennedy’s assassination. How can that be explained?

And why did Johnson, Hoover and the Warren Commission quickly suppress the “rumors” of Oswald’s communist profile (already hitting the news on November 23, e.g. the morning front-page of the Washington Post titled, “Pro-Castro Fort Worth Marxist Charged in Kennedy’s Assassination”[2]), to replace it with his “lone nut” profile? James Douglass’s explanation is that Johnson thwarted the plot hatched by the CIA and Pentagon hawks, thus saving us from World War III. “To Johnson’s credit, he refused to let the Soviets take the blame for Kennedy’s murder; to his discredit, he decided not to confront the CIA over what it had done in Mexico City. Thus, while the secondary purpose of the assassination plot was stymied, its primary purpose was achieved.”[3] The problem with this theory is its internal contradiction, since it also affirms that the reason Kennedy was assassinated was that he refused to start World War III: therefore, starting the war was supposedly the primary — not the secondary — purpose of the whole plot.

The alternative explanation is that Oswald’s profile as a Communist assassin was crafted by the conspirators, not for the purpose of starting a war against Cuba and Russia, but for allowing Johnson to bully Federal and State administrations, and even the news community, into closing the investigation quickly, lest the discovery of Cuba and Russia’s responsibility force the U.S. into a global nuclear war “that would kill 40 million Americans in an hour,” as Johnson kept repeating to everyone from Dallas to Washington. To convince Senator Richard Russell to sit in the Warren Commission, for example, Johnson told him in a taped phone conversation: “we’ve go to take this out of the arena where they’re testifying that Khrushchev and Castro did this and did that and kicking us into a war that can kill forty million Americans in an hour…”[4]


Besides allowing Johnson to shut down Police investigations and secretly task the Warren Commission with the goal of “rebutting thought that this was a Communist conspiracy” (as recommended by Deputy Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach’s November 25 memo[5]), the threat of nuclear war kept the American people satisfied that, if they were being lied to — as many felt they were — it was for their own good. And so the lie about Kennedy’s assassination was two-sided: on one side was the Cuban-Soviet conspiracy, and on the other was the lone assassin. Both sides of the lie had to be maintained over the years, the Soviet conspiracy remaining in the background in order to keep the Warren Commission’s conclusion, if not credible, at least justifiable. That is why, in a September 1969 filmed interview (broadcast on CBS on April 24, 1975), Johnson could calmly declare that “there might have been international connections,” but that the Warren Commission did a fine job anyway.[6]

Like most JFK researchers, John Newman, a retired U.S. Army major and Political Science professor and the author of Oswald and the CIA, believes that long before Kennedy’s trip to Dallas, Oswald was maneuvered and his activities “carefully monitored, controlled, and, if necessary, embellished and choreographed,” so that, “on 22 November, Oswald’s CIA files would establish his connection to Castro and the Kremlin.” However, in an epilogue added in 2008 to his book (which Ron Unz has already referred to here and here)Newman reasons that the real purpose of setting up Oswald as a Communist was not to start World War III, but to create a “World War III virus”, used by Johnson as a “national security” pretext to shut all investigations and intimidate the corporate media. “It is now apparent that the World War III pretext for a national security cover-up was built into the fabric of the plot to assassinate President Kennedy.”[7]

After reviewing the steps taken to design this plot, Newman concludes: “In my view, there is only one person whose hands fit into these gloves: James Jesus Angleton, Chief of CIA’s Counterintelligence Staff.”

No one else in the Agency had the access, the authority, and the diabolically ingenious mind to manage this sophisticated plot. No one else had the means necessary to plant the WWIII virus in Oswald’s files and keep it dormant for six weeks until the president’s assassination. Whoever those who were ultimately responsible for the decision to kill Kennedy were, their reach extended into the national intelligence apparatus to such a degree that they could call upon a person who knew its inner secrets and workings so well that he could design a failsafe mechanism into the fabric of the plot. The only person who could ensure a national security cover-up of an apparent counterintelligence nightmare was the head of counterintelligence [Angleton].[8]

As a matter of fact, no one pushed more for incriminating the KGB than Angleton. Michael Collins Piper, who wrote much about Angleton in his groundbreaking Final Judgment, showed that Angleton went to great length to discredit, imprison and torture Russian Soviet defector Yuri Nosenko. who in 1964 claimed insistently that the KGB had decided against trying to use Oswald in any way during his sojourn in Russia, and that the KGB had nothing to do with Kennedy’s assassination. Angleton was also the main source for Edward Jay Epstein’s book, Legend: The Secret World of Lee Harvey Oswald (published in 1978), which laid the blame on the KGB.[9]


Angleton was appointed head of the Counterintelligence Staff by CIA Director Allen Dulles in 1954, a position he kept for twenty years. According to Tom Mangold, author of Cold Warrior: James Jesus Angleton: the CIA’s Master Spy Hunter (Simon & Schuster, 1991): “Angleton’s longstanding friendships with Dulles and Helms were to become the most important factor in giving him freedom of movement within the CIA. He was extended such trust by his superiors that there was often a significant failure of executive control over his activities.”[10]

After Kennedy fired Dulles and his two Deputy Directors Richard Bissel and Charles Cabell in autumn 1961, Angleton was shielded by new Deputy Director Richard Helms, who had survived the purge and would end up as head of the CIA. In 1962, as the CIA moved into its new headquarters in Langley, Angleton’s Counterintelligence Staff had nearly two hundred people.[11]

As one colleague and friend said, “Jim’s central dominating obsession was communism, something that for him was the essence of absolute and profound evil. For him nothing else really mattered, but he would use anyone and anything to combat it.”[12] The most secret component of Angleton’s empire was the Special Investigation Group (SIG), tasked with exploring the possibility that the CIA was infiltrated by the KGB. “The SIG was so secret that many members of the Counterintelligence Staff didn’t even know it existed,” writes Mangold, “and nearly everyone was denied access to it. . . . Secret units within a secret unit were a hallmark of Angleton, the SIG, and the Counterintelligence Staff.”[13]

The tragicomic story of Angleton’s “mole hunt” is told in detail by Tom Mangold. It involves a megalomaniac KGB defector named Anatoly Golitsyn, who, responding to Angleton’s paranoia, convinced him that the KGB had infiltrated the CIA through a high-level source code-named “Sacha”, and that all other defectors after him would be phony. Angleton’s quest for Sacha would last seven years. About 40 senior Agency officers were put on the suspect list and many had their careers ruined, while at least 22 genuine defectors were turned away. No real KGB spy was ever caught by Angleton. Meanwhile, the British Soviet agent Kim Philby remained Angleton’s most trusted friend until being unmasked in 1963, and one Counterintelligence agent, Clare Edward Petty, ended up believing “Sacha” must be Angleton himself.[14] This fiasco is the subject of David C. Martin’s book Wilderness of Mirrors (2018).[15] As Los Angeles Times journalist David Wise writes: “In the end, Angleton never found a mole. But he did more harm to the CIA than even the most talented mole could ever have accomplished.”[16]

When William Colby, from the Soviet Division, became Director of the CIA, he looked for a pretext to sack Angleton, and fired him in December 1974 after the disclosure by Seymour Hersh in the New York Times of two dubious domestic operations that his Counterintelligence Staff had been conducting in violation of the CIA’s charter: intercepting mail sent between the United States and the Soviet Union(Program HT/LINGUAL)and spying on American antiwar protestors (Operation CHAOS).

When George Kalaris, who replaced Angleton, directed an investigation into Angleton’s files, his team located over 40 vaults that had to be drilled open. It took three years to sort, destroy or classify the discovered materials, which had never been archived into the CIA’s central filing system. And it took CIA officer Cleveland Cram six years to write a report in 12 legal-sized volumes on the activities of the Counterintelligence Staff from 1954 to 1974.[17]

The most important conclusion is that Angleton’s Counterintelligence, which was involved in the preparation for JFK’s assassination, was not the CIA, but rather a “second CIA within the CIA” (as Peter Dale Scott put it), sealed from scrutiny and accountable to no one, yet supported by almost unlimited budget.[18] During Kennedy’s presidency, John McCone, an outsider, of course had no idea what Angleton was doing or not doing, and Richard Helms, his Deputy, let him do as he pleased.

But this Counterintelligence disaster is only half of Angleton’s story. There is another half, rarely told. Tom Mangold only refers to it in an endnote:

I would like to place on the record, however, that Angleton’s professional friends overseas, then and subsequently, came from the Mossad (the Israeli intelligence-gathering service) and that he was held in immense esteem by his Israeli colleagues and by the state of Israel, which was to award him profound honors after his death.[19]

To be fair, Mangold also writes: “Angleton’s ties with the Israelis gave him considerable prestige within the CIA and later added significantly to his expanding counterintelligence empire,” while stirring “the utter fury of the division’s separate Arab desks.”[20] But that’s all we’ll learn from Mangold about the Mossad-side of Angleton. To know more about it, we must turn to Jefferson Morley’s more recent and thorough investigation, The Ghost: The Secret Life of CIA Spymaster James Jesus Angleton (St. Martin’s Press, 2017). We will learn that Angleton was less “out of control” than we think — only the people who controlled him were not those who were supposed to.



When Angleton became chief of Counterintelligence in 1954, he had already been occupying, since early 1951, the CIA’s Israeli Desk, or Israeli Account, as it was called. And he had exclusive authority on the CIA station in Tel Aviv. The Israeli Desk was created for Angleton after the visit of Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion to the United States in May 1951. Besides launching a drive to raise \$1 billion from the sale of Israel Bonds,[21] the purpose of Ben-Gurion’s visit was to establish collaboration between U.S. and Israeli intelligence agencies. Israel’s population of immigrants from the U.S.S.R. and Eastern Europe made the country a privileged source of information about what was going on behind the Iron Curtain. In exchange for this service, Israel wanted strategic, economic and military support against their enemy Nasser, whom they did their utmost to push into the Soviet camp. Here is Morley’s account of the background for that turning point in U.S.-Israel relationship:

In 1950, Reuven Shiloah, the founder of Israel’s first intelligence organization, visited Washington and came away impressed by the CIA. In April 1951, he reorganized the fractious Israeli security forces to create a new foreign intelligence agency, called the Institute for Intelligence and Special Tasks, inevitably known as the Mossad, the Hebrew word for “institute.” In 1951, Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion came to the United States and brought Shiloah with him. Ben-Gurion met privately with President Truman and Walter Bedell Smith [director of CIA]. Angleton arranged for Ben-Gurion to lunch with Allen Dulles [Deputy Director for Plans] . . . Shiloah stayed on in Washington to work out the arrangements with Angleton. The resulting agreement laid the foundation for the exchange of secret information between the two services and committed them to report to each other on subjects of mutual interest. Shiloah, according to his biographer [Haggai Eshed], soon developed “a special relationship” with Angleton, who became the CIA’s exclusive liaison with the Mossad. Angleton returned the favor by visiting Israel. Shiloah introduced him to Amos Manor, chief of counterespionage for Israel’s domestic intelligence agency [1953-1963], known as Shabak or Shin Bet.[22]

For almost 25 years, Angleton was the CIA’s exclusive liaison with Israeli intelligence. In this capacity, recalled one of his friends interviewed by Andrew and Leslie Cockburn for their book Dangerous Liaison: The Inside Story of the U.S.-Israeli Covert Relationship, “he was getting the benefit of Israeli networks and connections all over the place, not just in the Communist bloc.”[23]

Angleton’s special channel to the Mossad brought little profit to the U.S. in terms of intelligence. In October 1956, no warning came from Angleton about the Israelis’ plan to invade Egypt. As rumors of war were reaching the State Department, Robert Amory, head of the CIA Directorate of Intelligence, called an emergency meeting on October 26. After he presented Allen Dulles with evidence that the Israelis “were mobilizing to attack someone — Egypt,” Angleton contradicted him saying, “I can discount what Amory is saying. I spent last night with our friends and they have assured me that they are just carrying out protective measures against the Jordanians.” Amory got mad and said to Dulles: “The taxpayer lays out \$16,000 a year to me as your deputy director for me to give you the best intelligence available. Either you believe me or you believe this co-opted Israeli agent here [pointing to Angleton].”[24] Within days, Israel had invaded Egypt’s Sinai.

James Jesus Angleton made his first visit to Israel in October 1951. “By the mid-1950s,” Morley writes, “Angleton liked nothing better than to leave the cramped office politics of Washington for the austere frontier of the Holy Land. On his visits, Angleton stayed in Ramat Gan, on the suburban coastal plain north of Tel Aviv, the home to many Israeli intelligence officers and diplomats.”

“He used to come from time to time, to meet the head of Mossad, to get briefings,” recalls Efraim Halevy, who served as the Mossad’s liaison officer to the CIA station in Tel Aviv in the early 1960s. Halevy escorted Angleton on his rounds and recorded his meetings with Israeli officials. “He used to meet with David Ben-Gurion, whom he knew for many years,” Halevy recalled. “Ben-Gurion ultimately left office [in 1963] and Angleton went down to Sde Boker [Ben-Gurion’s home in the Negev] to meet him. I didn’t attend those meetings. Those were just the two of them. He had business to transact.”[25]

Angleton knew at least six of the men closest to Ben-Gurion and privy to his secrets. Besides Efraim Halevy (on the right in the top picture), he befriended Isser Harel, founder of the Shin Bet and chief of the Mossad from 1951 (“Jim had enormous admiration for Isser,” said Halevy). Angleton also enjoyed the lifetime friendship of Amos Manor, director of Shin Bet from 1953 to 1963, of Teddy Kollek, who later became mayor of Jerusalem, and of Meir Amit, head of Mossad from 1963 to 1968. When Halevy accompanied Yitzhak Rabin for his ambassadorship to Washington (1968-1973), Angleton met him as often as five times a week, and had monthly lunches with Rabin, Halevy recalled. Angleton’s friends were among the builders of the Zionist state, and Angleton was the only American authorized to talk to them.[26]

This, coupled with his infatuation with Zionism, gave Angleton a great influence on Washington’s Israeli policy. According to Morley, “he was a leading architect of America’s strategic relationship with Israel that endures and dominates the region to this day.”[27] “Angleton’s influence on U.S.-Israeli relations between 1951 and 1974 exceeded that of any secretary of state, with the possible exception of Henry Kissinger. His influence was largely unseen by Congress, the press, other democratic institutions, and much of the CIA itself.”[28]

Speaking of Kissinger, Michael Piper mentions, quoting Deborah Davis’s biography of Katharine Graham, that Kissinger actually moved Angleton’s Israeli desk into the White House, and that both men worked very closely. In one of the most interesting appendixes added to his 1998 edition of Final Judgment, Piper argues that Angleton was the mastermind of the Watergate dirty trick that caused Nixon’s fall, using his longtime ally Ben Bradlee, then Washington Post editor. According to Piper, Watergate was “a joint CIA-Mossad operation—orchestrated by James Angleton—for the purpose of removing Nixon from the presidency.” Nixon had to be removed because, like Kennedy before him, he had become a threat to Israel’s survival.[29]



Naturally, Angleton’s influence on U.S.-Israeli relationship touched upon the sensitive question of Israel’s military nuclear ambition. Morley again:

In Washington, he and Cicely [Angleton’s wife] had spent many evenings with Memi de Shalit, a Lithuanian-born military intelligence officer stationed in the Israeli embassy. Angleton “adored” de Shalit and his wife, Ada, said Efraim Halevy. The de Shalits moved back to Israel in the 1950s, but the friendship continued, and it brought Angleton into the circle of other knowledgeable Israelis. Amos de Shalit, Memi’s brother, was a professor of nuclear physics at the Weizmann Institute of Science in Tel Aviv. He would be a major contributor to the Israeli nuclear program.[30]

According to Seymour Hersh, “Angleton’s close personal ties with the DeShalit family and others in Israel made it inevitable that he would learn about the [Dimona] construction in the Negev.” Yet he never reported on the Israelis’ efforts to build a nuclear reactor for military purposes.[31] In 1960, Angleton ignored a request from the U.S. Intelligent Board, which reviewed CIA operations on behalf of the White House, that all information regarding Dimona be transmitted “expeditiously”.[32]

Angleton also failed to notice or to report about the stealing of weapons-grade enriched uranium from a plant of the Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation (NUMEC) in Apollo, Pennsylvania. The NUMEC had been created under U.S. government license by David Lowenthal, a Zionist financier, and was run by Zalman Shapiro, the son of an Orthodox rabbi from Lithuania, who was also head of the local chapter of the Zionist Organization of America. Over the 9 years from 1959 to 1968, the Atomic Energy Commission estimated that 267 kilograms of uranium went missing at the Apollo NUMEC plant. One Israeli masquerading as a nuclear engineer who visited the plant was a Mossad agent named Rafael Eitan, who was known to Angleton. “With the fissile material diverted from NUMEC, Israel was able to construct its first nuclear weapon by 1967 and become a full-blown nuclear power by 1970 — the first, and still the only, nuclear power in the Middle East. Angleton, it is fair to say, thought collaboration with Israel was more important than U.S. non-proliferation policy.”[33]

“Angleton’s loyalty to Israel betrayed U.S. policy on an epic scale,” Morley concludes. “Instead of supporting U.S. nuclear security policy, he ignored it.” John Hadden, then CIA station chief in Tel Aviv, who felt betrayed by his superior Angleton, wrote in 1978: “A crime was committed 10 or 20 years ago, a crime considered so serious that for its commission the death penalty is mandatory and no statute of limitations applies.”

Angleton had regular professional and personal contact with at least six men aware of Israel’s secret plan to build a bomb. From Asher Ben-Natan to Amos de Shalit to Isser Harel to Meir Amit to Moshe Dayan to Yval Ne’eman, his friends were involved in the building of Israel’s nuclear arsenal. If he learned anything of the secret program at Dimona, he reported very little of it. . . . The failure of the U.S. nonproliferation policy to prevent the introduction of nuclear weapons to the Middle East in the 1960s is part of Angleton’s legacy, and its effects will be felt for decades, if not centuries.[34]

Angleton himself implicitly acknowledged his role to New York Times foreign correspondent Tad Szulc, who declared before the Church Committee in 1975:

I was told by one of my news sources that a situation had occurred in the 1960s in which the CIA delivered to the Israeli government classified information, technical knowledge, know-how, the services of distinguished physicists and fissionable material in the form of plutonium to assist in the development of an Israeli nuclear weapon at the Dimona Israeli Nuclear Testing grounds. . . I have raised the subject in a private conversation with Mr. James Angleton in the spring of this year [April 1975]. Mr. Angleton told me that essentially this information was correct.[35]

The Six Day War and the USS Liberty

According to Andrew and Leslie Cockburn, “There is a body of opinion within the American intelligence community that Angleton played a leading part in orchestrating the events leading up to the June 1967 war. One long-serving official at CIA’s ancient rival, the code-breaking National Security Agency, states flatly that ‘Jim Angleton and the Israelis spent a year cooking up the ’67 war. It was a CIA operation designed to get Nasser.’”[36]

In that period, according to Joan Mellen, author of Blood in the Water: How the US and Israel Conspire to Ambush the USS Liberty (2018), “Meir Amit was Angleton’s chief ally in Israel, but in the United States, he relied on another Mossad operative, Ephraim ‘Eppy’ Evron, who in 1967, as a Mossad operative as well as deputy Israeli ambassador to Washington, enjoyed greater importance at the Israeli embassy than the ambassador, Avraham Harman. It was Evron who had arranged meetings between Angleton and Moshe Dayan . . . to discuss the feasibility of an attack on Egypt with the objective of toppling Nasser. Lyndon Johnson had authorized Angleton to inform Evron that the United States would not intervene to stop an attack on Egypt.”[37]

In May 1967, Eppy Evron met Johnson at the White House. Evron later said that Johnson told him, “You and I are going to pass another Tonkin resolution,” in reference to the mock incident in the Gulf of Tonkin that Johnson used to justify the aggression against North Vietnam.[38] On May 30, Meir Amit, then head of global operations for Mossad, flew to Washington and met first with Angleton the next day. There is no documentary record of their conversation, but on June 1, Amit reported to Israel: “there is a growing chance for American political backing if we act on our own.”[39] “It would be Angleton,” says Joan Mellen, “who would prevail in formulating, with Meir Amit, the configuration of the operation that would culminate in the attack on the USS Liberty.”[40]

Here a summary of Tom Segev’s account of this meeting in 1967: Israel, the War, and the Year That Transformed the Middle East (2007): “Amit’s trip to Washington had ben instigated by Aharon Yariv, and its main purpose was to find out, through intelligence channels, what the Americans would really do if Israel attacked Egypt.” The first person Amit met there was James Jesus Angleton, who introduced him to Helms, head of CIA. Helms “arranged for Amit to meet with Secretary of Defense McNamara.” Presenting Israel’s plan to attack Egypt, Amit “heard no objections from McNamara.” McNamara was called out of the meeting twice to talk with Johnson on the phone, and reported to Amit the President’s message: “I read you loud and clear.” Amit reported back to Israel his impression that the Americans would give their blessing to an Israeli strike “crushing Nasser.” In response to Eshkol’s question, Amit said they might even assist Israel in such a strike. “Jim Angleton was enthusiastic,” writes Segev; he saw in Israel’s strike “the possibility of solving the region’s problems.” He “stressed the issue’s delicacy and asked to preserve complete secrecy.” When corresponding with Eshkol on the phone, Amit acknowledged the decisive importance of Angleton’s support. Angleton, he said, intimated that the Americans “would undoubtedly look positively on a knockout” on Egypt; “Angleton was an extraordinary asset for us. We could not have found ourselves a better advocate.” He was “the biggest Zionist of the lot,” insisted Amit.[41]

In December 1967, having more than doubled their territory, the Israelis threw a big party for Angleton when he visited them on his 50th birthday.


The Mossad side of Angleton is part of the “unspoken Kennedy truth” that, in Michael Collins Piper’s footsteps, I documented in my book and in this article. It is no small part. As Morley writes, “Angleton’s formative and sometimes decisive influence on U.S. policy toward Israel can be seen in many areas — from the impotence of U.S. nuclear non-proliferation policy in the region, to Israel’s triumph in the 1967 Six-Day War, to the feeble U.S. response to the attack on the Liberty, to the intelligence failure represented by the Yom Kippur War of 1973.”[42]

Angleton is remembered in the U.S. as a mentally unstable man who caused irreparable damage to the CIA’s efficiency and reputation. In contrast, he is remembered in Israel as a great benefactor of the Zionist state. Here is an extract from the Washington Post report about a ceremony held in his honor in Jerusalem after his death. Although it was supposedly secret, a couple of Israeli reporters, including Andy Court of the Jerusalem Post, had been tipped off and attended:

The head of the pathologically secretive spy agency, the Mossad, was there, as was his counterpart with Shin Bet, the Israeli internal security service. Five former heads of those agencies and three former military intelligence chiefs were also present. Their mission: to pay final tribute to a beloved member of their covert fraternity — the late CIA chief of counterintelligence, James Jesus Angleton. . . . Following the planting [of trees], the group gathered again in Jerusalem behind the King David Hotel at a scenic spot not far from the walls of the Old City that Angleton often visited on his trips here. There they dedicated a memorial stone that read, in English, Hebrew and Arabic: “In memory of a dear friend, James (Jim) Angleton.” . . . The ceremonies symbolized the respect and affection that the Israeli intelligence community holds for Angleton . . . Although his name appears in few history books about Israel, Angleton played a crucial role in the early years of the young Jewish state. In the 1950s and early 1960s, when most of official Washington was wary of — even hostile to — Israel, he helped forge links between the Mossad and the CIA that established the basis for cooperation in intelligence gathering that still exists today. . . . Angleton “was a friend you could trust on a personal basis,” said Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin, who spoke at the tree-planting ceremony. Rabin knew Angleton from his days as Israeli Army chief of staff in the mid-1960s and later as ambassador to the United States. Jerusalem Mayor Teddy Kollek, who rose from his sickbed to attend the ceremonies, told the small crowd, “We commemorate a great friend, who saw Israel-U.S. relations through their most difficult period in the 40 years of Israel’s existence.” . . . Those who attended, according to Court, included the current heads of the Mossad and Shin Bet, neither of whom can be named under government security laws; former Mossad chiefs Meir Amit, Zvi Zamir and Yitzhak Hofi; former Shin Bet chiefs Avraham Ahituv and Amos Manor, and former military intelligence heads Aharon Yariv, Shlomo Gazit and Binyamin Gibli.[43]

There is still a mystery about Angleton’s relationship with Israel, a mystery that perhaps Angleton himself could not have cleared up. It is a reasonable guess that most of Angleton’s Israeli friends were well aware of his personality issues and of his delusional worldview, and that they exploited them to the fullest; they convinced Angleton that they were his indispensable allies against Communism. One former Mossad chief said to the Cockburns: “Of course, Jim had some pretty weird ideas, like that one about the Sino-Soviet split [Angleton believed it was a cunning deception]. But I think that he found himself a little more appreciated here in Israel than in Washington. We would listen respectfully to him [here the smirk] and his opinions.” The Israelis, gather the Cockburns, “took great care to flatter him and bend a respectful ear to his interpretation of events in the shadowy world of intelligence and deception.” Taking a closer look at the Angleton memorial in the Jerusalem forest, the Cockburns point out that, “Unlike the other memorial groves, the inscription here is not carved in stone, but is written on a sheet of plastic screwed to the stone itself. Within a year of the commemoration of the site most of the trees, tiny saplings, were dead or dying. The ground all around was covered in garbage: cans, rags, and, here and there, bones.”[44] What kind of memorial is this? A memorial for a useful idiot that can be soon forgotten.

What was Angleton’s position in the organizational chart of the plotters against Kennedy? If, as John Newman believes, Angleton was the “general manager” of Oswald’s handlers, and the engineer of his mock appearance in Mexico, what did he really know of Oswald’s ultimate function in the plot? There is no indication that Angleton ever felt that he had been used by his Israeli friends, and it is therefore more than likely that he was a deliberate participant in the conspiracy to kill Kennedy. What has been shown beyond a reasonable doubt is that Angleton, the central CIA player in the plot to kill JFK, was in reality more controlled by the Mossad than by the CIA itself.


I am happy to see that this conclusion is now becoming more accepted among Kennedy researchers. Peter Janney, author of the acclaimed Mary’s Mosaic: The CIA Conspiracy to Murder John F. Kennedy, Mary Pinchot Meyer, and Their Vision for World Peace (2012), in which Angleton figures prominently, honored me with a comment on the Amazon page of my book:

In addition to his book JFK – 9/11: 50 Years of Deep State, which was published in 2017, Laurent Guyénot has given us yet another gem with The Unspoken Kennedy Truth.

As the author of “Mary’s Mosaic” and someone who has spent many, many years studying the JFK assassination, Laurent Guyénot takes us where few have dared to tread — the role of Mossad and Israel in the murders of both Kennedy brothers and very likely in the event of 9/11 itself. I have been persuaded by both these books and have come to the conclusion that JFK assassination researchers have missed a vital element in understanding the larger role of Israel…

Is it a coincidence that there are not just one — but two — monuments in Israel to the legendary CIA Counterintelligence Chief James Jesus Angleton? Are we anti-Semites for making an indictment against Israel, given Guyénot’s persuasive argument that is supported by evidence? The answer is no! The truth takes no prisoners…


Phillip Nelson, author of LBJ, The Mastermind of JFK’s Assassination (2010), the ultimate 720-page indictment of Johnson (followed by LBJ: From Mastermind to “the Colossus” and Remember the Liberty), also wrote a comment that I am proud to quote: “Guyénot’s short book covers much territory, some of it never so thoroughly explored before. … He has made a very compelling and persuasive argument for his position and I recognize the truths he has revealed.” Nelson has reservations, however, on the thesis that Ben-Gurion was the “driving force” behind the assassination of JFK.

The major problem with his thesis is that the problems with Dimona didn’t arise and become the hot topic between JFK and Ben-Gurion until 1963. LBJ’s plot to take the White House by the “back door” began in 1958, when he pushed the Texas legislature to allow him to run on both the state ballot and the national ballot at the same time, something it had then prohibited. That was only the first box he had to check-off, five years before the assassination.

In my opinion, it’s more likely that, during that five years, Johnson and Ben-Gurion, with their submissive acolytes, discussed many of their goals and priorities, and that the “Big Event” became a mutually-agreed high priority, with plenty of time to set all the knights, bishops, kings, queens, and pawns, in their place.

I think Johnson made it on Kennedy’s ticket in 1960 only because the Zionists (Abe Feinberg) wanted him there, as Kennedy’s potential assassin and future “best U.S. president for Israel ever.” For as I wrote in “The Umbrella Man, the Sins of the Father, and the Kennedy Curse”, long before 1960, the Israelis saw the Kennedys as a serious potential threat to their expansionist ambitions, and rightly so. In the organization chart of the plot, I place Ben-Gurion higher than LBJ. But that is open to debate.












FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<


you say mossad, I say castro... but.....

WHAT FOLLOWS SEEMS TO BE ANOTHER SMOKESCREEN IN THE JFK MURDER..... GUS LEONISKY AND HIS PUB DRINKING MATES STILL THINK THAT THE REAL REASON JFK WAS SHOT WAS THAT HE WAS ABOUT TO MAKE PEACE WITH RUSSIA.... “What I want, what I want, Dick,” he rasped, “regarding any understanding, regarding any information, I do not want any information that comes in from you on these delicate and sensitive subjects to go to anybody outside …” Nixon was finally ready to tip his hand. “The ‘Who shot John?’ angle,” he said quietly, 17 minutes into the conversation. Nixon did not dwell on the phrase. He didn’t need to. In the context of his long-standing demand for the CIA’s records, the invocation of “the ‘Who shot John?’ angle” can only refer to one thing: Kennedy’s assassination. The ambush in Dallas was the first thing on Nixon’s mind as he pressed the director for the agency’s Bay of Pigs files. The president intuited a connection between the failed invasion in 1961 and JFK’s assassination two years later. Nixon had no desire to expose what Helms called the agency’s “dirty linen.” Rather, he wanted to use the Bay of Pigs issue against presumed rival Ted Kennedy while defending the CIA from recent allegations that the CIA’s plots against Castro had led to JFK’s death. Nixon knew the Agency was vulnerable to JFK’s assassination, which he presumed gave him leverage over Helms. Nixon assured Helms that his concern was not the agency’s actions related to Kennedy’s assassination but the criticism he faced as president. “Is Eisenhower to blame? Is Johnson to blame? Is Kennedy to blame? Is Nixon to blame?” the president went on. “Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. It may become — not by me — but it may become a very, very vigorous issue. If it does …” Nixon couldn’t have been referring to the Bay of Pigs or Cuba, which were both dead issues by then. The JFK assassination story, by contrast, had erupted vigorously earlier that year. In January 1971, a front-page New York Times story reported that Dallas police chief Jesse Curry published a book saying JFK had been killed by a conspiracy. The same day, Jack Anderson, the syndicated investigative reporter, wrote a startling column in The Washington Post that began, “Locked in the darkest recesses of the Central Intelligence Agency is the story of six assassination attempts against Cuba’s Fidel Castro.” The story, picked up by the TV networks, was disturbingly accurate to Helms. There was indeed a top-secret CIA Inspector General’s report that itemized the six plots; Helms was running one of them on the day JFK was killed. Anderson’s source was a well-connected Washington lawyer representing Johnny Rosselli, the Mafia boss whom the CIA had enlisted to poison the Cuban leader in 1960. Anderson intimated that Castro had intercepted the CIA’s assassins and orchestrated Kennedy’s assassination as retaliation. By leaking his story, Rosselli effectively used the Post to blackmail the CIA — and it worked. The agency shielded Rosselli from deportation proceedings, according to a memo declassified in 1997. The CIA-blessed mobster never shared his knowledge of the Castro plots with federal prosecutors. The agreement prevented disclosure of the CIA’s assassination policy, which probably saved Helms’ job. Now Nixon wanted to know more about “the Who shot John? angle.” “I need to know what is necessary to protect, frankly, the intelligence gathering and the Dirty Tricks Department, and I will protect it,” the president avowed. “Hey, listen, I have done more than my share of lying to protect you, and I believe it’s totally right to do it.” Helms stayed silent. “If I don’t know,” Nixon asked plaintively, “then what do you have?” The president was beholden to his spymaster. This was a harsh reality of the Watergate affair, not reported by the Washington Post, not uncovered by Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. The CIA and Helms barely figure in All the President’s Men, or the iconic movie that followed. The Oval Office dynamic was also rather different than the showdown depicted by Oliver Stone. Helms did not threaten Nixon with a veiled reference to Kennedy’s assassination. In historical reality, the frustrated president unsuccessfully begged the imperious spy chief for more information about who killed his predecessor. “I don’t believe that you can say, well … the director of the CIA … is the only one who is to know what happened in certain circumstances,” Nixon said. “The president is to know, and that the president’s successor is not to know?” The agency’s JFK secrets were safe with him, Nixon emphasized. “I am not going to embarrass the CIA because it served. … I believe in Dirty Tricks.” Helms finally spoke. He appeased Nixon by offering a folder of CIA cables on the assassination of Diem, material that Nixon could use to impugn JFK’s legacy in the 1972 election. “Sir, I’m working entirely for you,” he assured the president. “Anything I’ve got is yours.” The partisan president came away happy. The canny director had given up nothing on the Bay of Pigs, the Castro plots or Kennedy’s assassination.... READ MORE: READ FROM TOP. FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW...................


A formatting issue has crept in the article above. Impossible to fix. Bear with it.... But it is fascinating nonetheless.....


Washington — The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) is set to release a new trove of documents related to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy on Thursday, disclosing never-before-seen government records amid a yearslong battle to uncover some of the most sensitive material related to Kennedy's death.

Under the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act in 1992, the government was required to release all documents related to the assassination by October 2017, unless doing so would harm national security or intelligence sources. Then-President Donald Trump released thousands of documents over the course of his presidency but withheld others on national security grounds.

In October 2021, President Biden released nearly 1,500 more documents while delaying the release of the most sensitive records until Dec. 15, 2022, saying further review was necessary to "protect against identifiable harm to the military defense, intelligence operations, law enforcement, or the conduct of foreign relations."

The Archives said last year that "[a]ny information currently withheld from public disclosure that agencies do not propose for continued postponement" beyond Dec. 15 would be released, leaving open the possibility that federal agencies could seek to further delay the unveiling of some of the outstanding records.

Kennedy was shot and killed while riding in his motorcade through Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963, at the age of 46. An investigation led by Chief Justice Earl Warren concluded that Lee Harvey Oswald, a former Marine and communist activist who had lived in the Soviet Union, acted alone, but the probe has been widely criticized by academics and historians in the nearly 60 years since the assassination.

Longtime JFK-watchers hoped that Thursday's release would shed more light on what the CIA knew about Oswald before Kennedy's assassination, particularly his activities in Mexico City, where he met with a KGB officer in October 1963. Oswald was shot and killed in the basement of the Dallas police headquarters two days after Kennedy's assassination, further fueling conspiracy theories about whether he was solely responsible for the killing.

The Mary Ferrell Foundation, a nonprofit group that maintains an online database of records related to the assassination, sued the Biden administration in October, accusing the government of failing to abide by the 2017 deadline for the release of all documents.

"These failures have resulted in confusion, gaps in the records, over-classification, and outright denial of thousands of assassination-related files, five years after the law's deadline for full disclosure," the organization said in a statement at the time, asking a judge to compel the documents' release or establish a more transparent national-security review process under the guidelines set by the 1992 law.










nothing new.....

“We can’t see classified information about maybe the pivotal event in modern American history — and now we know why.”

An extremely high-level source verified that the CIA had a hand in the assassination of former US President John F. Kennedy, Fox News Host Tucker Carlson has reported.

In an episode of “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” which aired Thursday evening, the Fox News host said a source – who is “directly and personally familiar” with internal documents that the CIA is refusing to disclose – confirmed the records do indeed show the CIA was responsible for killing the popular US president.



“Yes, I believe the CIA was involved in the assassination of President Kennedy,” the source stated, according to Carlson. “It’s a whole different country from what we thought it was. It’s all fake.”


On Thursday, the CIA released another trove of internal documents relating to its investigation into the killing. But the agency’s latest dump of its JFK assassination papers failed to disclose documents of any significance.

Experts suggested the lack of new information being revealed in the documents shows the CIA has something to hide.



“What the CIA has determined is the following: It is better to expose themselves to public criticism and literally act against what US law says, that it is preferable to do that having to deal with what can be published,” stated JFK researcher Fernand Amandi.


Skeptical observers have long contended that Lee Harvey Oswald, the man who the US government claims killed Kennedy, was actually a CIA asset. After the former Marine supposedly ‘defected’ to the Soviet Union, he was able to return to the US freely and faced no apparent barriers reintegrating. Both pro- and anti-Cuban activists in Dallas, Texas, reported frequent contacts with Oswald – suggesting he was seeking to influence both camps.

“Is there a ‘smoking gun?’ Is there one piece of paper that proves a conspiracy?” asked JFK researcher and former Washington Post reporter Jefferson Morley. “No. ....But there IS smoking gun proof that [the] CIA had an operational interest in Oswald while JFK was alive.”

Is there a "smoking gun? Is there one piece of paper that proves a conspiracy? No. ....But there IS smoking gun proof that CIA had an operational interest in Oswald while JFK was alive. .... I described it at theNational Press Club last week.

— Jefferson Morley (@jeffersonmorley) December 15, 2022

With the CIA continuing to illegally withhold records pertaining to the Kennedy assassination, the situation facing Americans is grim, Carlson concluded.



“Within the US government there are forces wholly beyond democratic control” which are “more powerful than the elected officials that supposedly oversee them,” he noted.


“These forces can affect election outcomes. They can even hide their complicity in the murder of an American president. In other words, they can do pretty much whatever they want.”

It’s clear now that the CIA, Carlson said, constitutes “a government within a government, mocking with their very existence the idea of democracy.”

“Americans have trusted their government less with every passing year since the killing of Kennedy,” he pointed out. “Maybe this is why.”

Former CIA Director Mike Pompeo was invited onto the show to discuss the jaw-dropping allegations of agency involvement in the Kennedy assassination, but “refused to come on,” per the Fox News host.












the zionists?....

Barren Summit

Forty years and counting
Since Kennedy was killed
And our vacuum of leadership
Still has not been filled.

Why should those shoes present
Such difficulty filling?
The candidates are weeded out
By those who did the killing.

by David Martin, author of The Assassination of James Forrestal (2019)






The last few years have been a painful time for those of us old enough to remember the 1960s. Over my lifetime I watched my country decline by every measure of greatness. It’s been excruciating, slow and nearly imperceptible from day to day, like water torture. Who would have guessed, even ten years ago, that we would now be on the brink of nuclear war with Russia? Each day, I scour the news and Internet hoping and praying for the peace movement to show up. But where are they? Even as events continue to escalate and momentum builds for a wider war in eastern Europe, I see no placards, no protesters in the streets, and very little evidence that our people understand what is happening. I never thought it would come to this.

World War II concluded ~78 years ago and today almost no one is left alive who remembers. Must we relive the nightmares of history every third or fourth generation simply because humans do not live long enough to preserve the horrific memories of the last war? Something within me resists this explanation, however, as too simplistic. There is another possibility: that our people have been disenfranchised, so dumbed down and demoralized by umpteen years of nonstop propaganda (including Russia-hate) that they are no longer able to think clearly, nor act to restore our country.

In my opinion, the greatest measure of our decline has been the abysmal quality of our leadership, especially at the national level. If this is true, then we must ask: How did it happen? In articles I read and while talking with friends, I often see/hear it repeated that the downward spiral started with the assassination of John F. Kennedy. I agree and take it as self evident that rightful authority has been under assault ever since.

Recently, I was compelled to modify my own views about the JFK murder, after reading an extraordinary book by a French writer Laurent GuyenotFrom Yahweh to Zion (2020). The author is an outstanding biblical scholar, and he has written the most penetrating analysis of Zionism I have ever seen. Like many Americans, I once believed that the CIA and Italian mafia were behind the JFK assassination. But I now discount the-CIA-&-mob-did-it narrative as just another limited hangout.

Over the years, I studied the JFK murder spasmodically, returning to the issue again and again. But the truth remained elusive because of false leads, misdirections and conflicting narratives, the purpose of which, we need to understand, is to obfuscate the facts and keep us in the dark. Yet, despite all of the mind control and propaganda, evidence has been mounting that vice president Lyndon Johnson (LBJ) orchestrated the assassination of John F. Kennedy. I will now present some of the most salient points, the gist of what I have learned.

President John F. Kennedy’s plan to drop Lyndon Johnson from the ticket during his upcoming re-election campaign in 1964 has been widely reported. But less well known is the fact that Johnson was not only going to be replaced, he was facing prison time. During his brother’s first term, Attorney General Robert Kennedy learned a great deal about Johnson’s criminal activities. And RFK had begun feeding this evidence to the Senate Rules Committee. Just hours before his brother was gunned down in Dallas, the committee heard testimony that Johnson had received a $100,000 kickback for finagling a contract with a Ft Worth Texas firm, General Dynamics, to build the F-111 fighter plane. (Roger Stone, The Man Who Killed Kennedy, 2013, p. 198)

There was also evidence Johnson received another large kickback from a Texas businessman, Billie Sol Estes. Earlier, Johnson had tipped off Estes that Congress would soon pass a bill to pay farmers not to grow cotton. At the time, the country had a huge cotton surplus and the glut was driving down the price. Estes moved quickly to exploit the inside information by leasing hundreds of thousands of acres of Texas farmland, which ‘entitled’ him to millions in subsidies. Later, he admitted that he personally delivered a suitcase with $200,000 in cash to Johnson as payment for the tip. (James T. Tague, LBJ and the Kennedy Killing, 2013, p. 400)

Life Magazine was also gathering evidence about Johnson’s shady dealings and was set to run an expose in the next issue. Today, few Americans realize that at the time of JFK’s murder Johnson was facing a corruption scandal and the likelihood of prosecution. Had the facts come out, LBJ’s political career would have been over. Vice president Johnson only flipped the situation by removing the man who stood in his path to power. (The Man Who Killed Kennedy, p. 199)

Several of Johnson’s Texas associates, including his secretary Bobby Baker and Billie Sol Estes eventually did go to prison. Years later, Estes told a Texas Grand Jury that Johnson had ordered the murders of at least six other people, these were before Kennedy, including his own loose-lipped sister. Johnson’s sister Josepha apparently drank too much, slept around, and knew far too much about the stolen 1948 election that put Lyndon in the US Senate. In 1951, Johnson’s hit man, Mac Wallace, was convicted of one of these murders in the first degree. It was only Johnson’s skill at perverting the Texas judicial system that got Wallace off with a five-year suspended sentence. If this sounds incredible, that was also my reaction. Nonetheless, it happens to be true. (LBJ and the Kennedy Killing, p 395 – 400)

Some of the most damning testimony against Johnson was given by a prostitute named Madeleine Brown, his mistress of twenty-one years and the mother of one of his three known out-of-wedlock children. In later years, Brown spoke freely to researchers about what she knew. In 1988, she told James T. Tague that on New Year’s Eve, 1964, a very intoxicated Johnson told her the sordid tale about how he arranged Kennedy’s assassination. (LBJ and the Kennedy Killing, p. 321)

Should we believe her? Is the testimony of a prostitute credible? The late author James T. Tague thought so. In his 2013 book, LBJ and the Kennedy Killing Tague stated that although initially he dismissed Brown’s story as outlandish, over the years as he dug deeper he was able to corroborate nearly everything she told him. Tague was himself in Dallas on the day Kennedy died. He was standing near the Dealey Plaza overpass when it happened, and was slightly wounded by a small piece of concrete that flew up in his face when an errant bullet hit the nearby curb. The experience made such a deep impression on Tague that he spent the next forty years investigating Kennedy’s murder. His book makes for essential reading. (LBJ and the Kennedy Killing, p. 353-356)

But on the night before the killing there was also a fateful meeting in Dallas at the sprawling suburban home of oil millionaire Clint Murchison. It was billed as a birthday party with dinner and drinks to honor J. Edgar Hoover, FBI Director whose long-time friendship with Murchison is well documented. Hoover and his partner Clyde Tolson (second in command at the FBI) were frequent guests at Murchison’s famous race track at La Jolla, California. Both men were gamblers and loved horse racing.

That evening, Johnson did not arrive until well after midnight as the guests were thinning out. At which time, a smaller group gathered in a separate room behind closed doors. Brown told Tague she waited in the living room, and when this second meeting finally broke up, Johnson came over, squeezed her hand, and whispered in her ear: “after tomorrow those Kennedys will never embarrass me again.” (LBJ and the Kennedy Killing, p. 356)

Madeleine Brown held an executive position at a commercial advertising firm in Dallas. She told a friend she worked in advertising by day and as a call girl by night. She was a high-class hooker and came to know many powerful and wealthy men in Texas society. She was a familiar face for this reason and because of her relationship with Johnson. Brown knew all of the principals at Murchison’s party and she identified twenty-five individuals who stayed for the subsequent meeting. Her list of names originally appeared in Robert Gaylon Ross’s 2001 book, The Elite serial Killers. Tague acknowledges that Brown had been drinking that night. He concedes that her list needs further vetting. Clarity about who left early and who stayed for the late night meeting is vital because the latter group was complicit in the murder of Kennedy.

Murchison’s cook and the butler corroborated some of the names, as did Robert Gaylon Ross who was Tague’s friend. I am not going to discuss every name on the list, only those that in my view are the most important. Here is the list.

  • H. L. Hunt, billionaire oil man
  • Texas governor John Connally
  • FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover
  • Clyde Tolson, second in command of the FBI
  • Dallas mayor Earle Cabell
  • ex-Dallas mayor R. L. Thornton
  • Dallas County sheriff Bill Decker
  • Jack Ruby
  • Carlos Marcello
  • Texas ranger and US marshal Clint Peoples
  • W. O. Bankston, local car dealer
  • Joe Yarbrough, construction
  • George Brown, of Brown and Root
  • Amon G. Carter Jr.
  • John Currington, advisor to H. L. Hunt
  • John McCloy, chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations
  • B. R. Sheffield, military construction
  • Cliff Carter, executive director of the Democratic National Committee
  • Joe Civello, Dallas mafia
  • Larry Campbell, Jimmy Hoffa representative
  • Don Smith, General manager, Del Mar race track
  • Mac Wallace, assassin

Notice, the list includes Texas Governor John Connally, Dallas mayor Earle Cabell, the ex-mayor R. L. Thornton, and the Dallas County sheriff Bill Decker. Through Cabell and Decker Johnson also controlled Dallas chief of police Jesse Curry and the chief of homicide, Will Fritz.

Governor Connally’s name was on the list, and his role was crucial. It was Connally who originally invited president Kennedy to Texas. A problem arose, however, because the White House advance man, Jerry Bruno, insisted on a different motorcade route that did not include Dealey Plaza, which was the site for the planned hit. When Connally refused to budge about the route the disagreement became so bitter the White House asked Bill Moyers, then deputy director of the Peace Corps, to try to mediate a solution. Moyers was close to both Connally and Johnson. It was only after Connally threatened to cancel the presidential visit altogether that the White House finally relented and agreed to the route through Dealey Plaza. (The Man Who Killed Kennedy, p. 222-223)

Another dust up also involved Connally, though indirectly. Early on the evening of November 21, Kennedy summoned Johnson to his suite at the Rice Hotel in Houston. A fierce argument ensued about who would sit where in the motorcade the next day in Dallas. Johnson wanted Connally to ride with him out of concern for his safety. But Kennedy wanted a show of party unity and insisted that Senator Ralph Yarborough should ride with Johnson. Yarborough was the leader of the liberal wing of the Democratic Party in Texas, while Johnson led the conservative Democrats. This meant Connally would sit with Kennedy in the lead vehicle, exposing him to serious injury or death. Kennedy won the argument. A furious Johnson reportedly stormed out of the room.

Despite the risks, Connally did as he was told. He had been Johnson’s subservient bagman ever since the stolen 1948 election when he served as Johnson’s campaign manager. Johnson once bragged: ‘I can call John Connally at midnight, and if I tell him to come over and clean my shoes, he’ll come running.’ Johnson’s argument with Kennedy in Houston explains why he did not arrive at Murchison’s until after midnight. (Robert A. Caro, Means of Ascent, 1990, p.118)

Also present was Amon G. Carter, Jr., owner of the Ft. Worth Star Telegram, the largest circulation newspaper in Texas. Carter also owned WBAC radio and a TV network, Channel 5 (NBC 5).

As noted, J. Edgar Hoover was also in attendance. He was a long time ally of Johnson’s and his role was vital: Hoover would manage the cover up. The FBI would control the forensic evidence and steer any investigation toward the predetermined narrative of a lone gunman.

Consider that through the aforementioned individuals Johnson controlled state and local government, the site for the planned hit, law enforcement, the media, and the cover up. LBJ had all of the bases covered.

But Johnson also had unlimited financial backing from the oil patch. Oil tycoon H. L. Hunt was present and no doubt shared his friend Clint Murchison’s antipathy for president Kennedy. Both men stood to lose millions if Kennedy went ahead with his announced plan to reduce or eliminate the oil depletion allowance. Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg once stated that her mother Jackie Kennedy Onassis believed that Texas oil men were behind the murder of her husband. (LBJ and the Kennedy Killing, p. 353)

At least one of the shooters was present, Mac Wallace who was a convicted murderer, as noted. Years later, a previously unidentified fingerprint that police lifted from a cardboard box on the sixth floor of the Texas Book Depository would be found to match Wallace’s prints taken at the time of his 1951 murder trial. (Jesse E. Curry, JFK Assassination File, 1969, p. 53; also see Barr McClellan, Blood. Money & Power: How LBJ Killed JFK, 2003; also see LBJ and the Kennedy Killing, p. 392)

Also present was the man who shot Lee Harvey Oswald: Jack Ruby. It is common knowledge that Ruby was a mobster and I had always assumed this meant the Italian variety. But I was wrong. Ruby’s actual name was Jacob Leon Rubenstein and he was the son of Jewish Polish immigrants. Ruby’s connections were with the Jewish underworld. According to former Los Angeles Police Department detective Gary Wean, Ruby was friendly with Los Angeles gangster Mickey Cohen who had replaced Benjamin “Bugsy Siegel” Siegelbaum as Jewish crime boss on the West coast. Detective Wean accumulated a large file on Cohen, and he claims that in 1946 when he first encountered Ruby in Los Angeles, Ruby was riding with Cohen in a large black limousine. A year later, Wean was introduced to Ruby at an LA nightclub known as Harry’s Place. (Gary Wean, There’s a Fish in the Courthouse, 1987, p. 681)

In his autobiography Mickey Cohen describes how he became infatuated with Zionism. He also explains how, after World War II, he started shipping army contraband and surplus weapons to the Irgun. (Mickey Cohen, In My Own Words, 1975, p. 91-92)

Cohen was personally acquainted with Irgun chief Menachem Begin whom he met while the terrorist was ‘on the lam’ sojourning in California. At the time, Begin was still wanted in Israel/Palestine for blowing up the King David Hotel in 1946. He would remain in the political wilderness until the 1967 Six Day War when prime minister Levi Eshkol invited him to join a ‘government of national unity.’ That signaled Begin’s ‘rehabilitation.’ Later, he would stage a political comeback and even become Israeli prime minister.

But Ruby was also associated with the ‘chairman of the board,’ Meyer Lansky, godfather of the Jewish underworld. Ruby owned a stake in Lansky’s gambling casino, the Colonial Inn, located north of Miami Beach. (Jim Marrs, Crossfire, 1989, p. 392)

Lanksy was also a Zionist with strong Israel connections. Lansky was a major donor to Israel and to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). His daughter Mira Lansky Boland later became an ADL official. (Steven Fox, Blood and Power: Organized Crime in Twentieth Century America, 1989, p. 314.)

I wish I had space here to adequately cover Meyer Lansky. But to do him ‘justice’ would fill a book. Lansky was the long-time accomplice and partner in crime of the notorious ‘Lucky’ Luciano. He was instrumental in arranging the historic meetings in 1943 between Luciano and the US Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI). At the time Luciano was serving a 30 – 50 year prison sentence in New York for running a prostitution racket. The US Navy needed the assistance of Luciano’s syndicate to protect US harbors and shipping from German sabotage and attacks that had become a serious problem. The deal crafted in the meetings with Luciano, mediated by Lansky, achieved the desired objective.

Later, Luciano’s mafia connections assured the success of the US invasion of Sicily and the roll back of Benito Mussolini. After the war, the US commuted Luciano’s sentence for services rendered and deported him back to Italy. Mussolini hated the mafia and by the 1930s had nearly eradicated it. But the fateful US government compromise with Luciano enabled the mafia to recover. Within two years, Luciano had rebuilt his heroin trafficking operation in Sicily on a bigger scale than ever. Meanwhile, Lansky managed Luciano’s financial affairs in the US. (Alfred W. McCoy, The Politics of Heroin, 1972, p. 28 – 45)

In 1949-1950, Lansky also helped Luciano set up the notorious French Connection that handled the processing and transport of Turkish opium to Marseilles where it was processed into heroin, then sent on to the US. The network was not solely Jewish and involved elements of Luciano’s Sicilian/Italian mafia and even Corsicans. But Lansky handled the finances and arranged the laundering of the profits. The Lansky-Luciano network ‘prospered’ for many years and resulted in a huge explosion of drug addiction in American cities. Much of the heroin entered the US through Cuba and Florida. Transport was handled by another Lansky ally, the Trafficante family based in Tampa. (The Politics of Heroin, p. 44-45)

A large portion of the profits returned to Europe where it was laundered through Swiss banks. After washing, the money came back to the US or went elsewhere for investment. Lansky, a wizard at laundering illicit money, used a number of Swiss banks including one he personally owned, the Exchange and Investment Bank of Geneva. Another was the brainchild of an orthodox rabbi, Tibor Pinchas Rosenbaum: the International Credit Bank (ICB) of Geneva. (The Politics of Heroin, p. 45; also see Michael Collins Piper, Final Judgement, 2004, chapters 7, 11 and 12))

ICB was a Jewish bank. Rosenbaum had also co-founded the World Zionist Congress and was a director (and treasurer) of the Jewish Agency. ICB had a reputation for accepting deposits from anywhere, no questions asked. Various ministries of the Israeli government held accounts at the bank, including the Mossad, the Defense Ministry, and the Histadrut, Israel’s labor federation. Another account was held by the Israel Corporation, a government supported development company. According to a report in the New York Times, ICB was used by the Israeli government for arms purchases and to ‘help channel funds from the international Jewish community into Israel.’ (Clyde H. Farnsworth, ‘A Global Bank Tangle and its Lost Millions’, The New York Times, April 9, 1975)

Did Israel use laundered drug money to finance arms deals, or even to finance Israel’s ultra-secret nuclear weapons program? It is possible. On one occasion Shimon Peres reportedly called up Rosenbaum and demanded $7 million dollars within 24 hours ‘for Israel’s national security.’ Rosenbaum complied and delivered the funds overnight. Given this kind of activity it is not surprising that ICB collapsed in 1974-1976 amidst claims of skimming and looted assets. The story is so tangled it resembles a trip down Alice’s rabbit hole or through the looking glass. (‘A Global Bank Tangle and its Lost Millions’)

With very few exceptions, students of the JFK assassination have typically passed over in silence the almost certain involvement of the Jewish underworld in the crime of the century. This needs to change for a reason that ought to be self-evident. In the early 1960s, Attorney General Robert Kennedy’s legal crusade against organized crime posed a serious and immediate threat to Meyer Lansky’s crime network in the US. In 1961, Kennedy’s justice department incarcerated Mickey Cohen, Lansky’s west coast boss, and charged him with tax evasion. (Wyatt Reid, Inside Mob Boss Mickey Cohen’s flashy Reign as the King of Los Angeles, August 6, 2022, posted at )

By 1963, RFK’s justice department was also targeting another Lansky figure, Carlos Marcello, who managed Lansky’s holdings in New Orleans. They had already deported Marcello once and in 1963 were attempting to do so again. The Jewish mob certainly had a motive to get rid of Kennedy. It is called self preservation. So, I was not surprised to learn that Marcello’s name is on the list, and that he was present that night at Murchison’s. (Hank Messick, Lansky, 1971, p. 86 – 87)

They say a sign hung above the door at Marcello’s Town and Country motel in New Orleans. The sign read: THREE CAN KEEP A SECRET IF TWO ARE DEAD. Although Marcello’s actual role in the JFK assassination remains unclear, one likely reason for his attendance in Dallas would have been to represent Lansky.

Jack Ruby’s role, on the other hand, was highly visible. Later, Ruby told his defense attorney William Kunstler that he killed Oswald “for the Jews.” The admission is so shocking that I obtained a copy of Kunstler’s autobiography just to confirm that Ruby said it. No mistake, the quote can be found in Kunstler’s book in black-and-white, verbatim. But no less shocking was Kunstler’s verbal hocus-pocus as he attempted to spin the comment and explain it away. (William Kunstler, My Life as a Radical Lawyer, 1996, p. 158-160)

Kunstler described Ruby as ‘as one of the most confused and confusing people I ever met.’ But Ruby seems perfectly clear to me in a 1965 interview. ( ) Notice, at the end Ruby mentions that if Adlai Stevenson had been vice president the JFK assassination would never have happened. His meaning could not be more clear. Stevenson was Kennedy’s preferred choice for VP in 1960. Ruby is fingering Johnson for Kennedy’s murder.

According to Peter Dale Scott, one of the first phone calls Ruby made after Oswald’s arrest was to Al Gruber, an associate of Mickey Cohen. (Peter Dale Scott, Deep Politics and the Death of JFK, 1993, p. 143)

My own view is that Ruby was under orders from LBJ to make the hit on Oswald. But it is also possible, even likely, that Ruby needed some additional ‘persuasion’ to stiffen his nerve. Any mob decision to cover up the assassination of a US president would have had to come from the very top. That might have been Luciano but for the fact Luciano passed away the previous year. In November 1963, that left Meyer Lansky as the boss of bosses. But Lansky would never have delivered such a message in person. He would have delegated the chore to someone close to Ruby. But not Cohen who was still behind bars.

As Gail Raven, a former girl friend and exotic dancer at Ruby’s Carousal Club put it: ‘He had no choice….Jack had bosses, just like everyone else.’ Notice that Raven refers to ‘bosses,’ not boss. (Arnaldo M. Fernandez, “The Hit Man And The Mobster: Jack Ruby And Santos Trafficante,” posted at )


Dorothy Kilgallen nearly busts open the case

Dorothy Kilgallen was one of the most intelligent journalists who wrote about the Kennedy assassination. She was also one of the bravest. For many years, Kilgallen was a regular on the popular TV quiz show, What’s My Line? where she displayed an ability to think on her feet. Kilgallen had a knack for discovering the true identity of the featured guests. She also wrote a weekly news/gossip column that was carried by 200 papers. Kilgallen’s specialty was juicy tid-bits from Hollywood, high profile court cases and unsolved murders. By the 1950s, Kilgallen enjoyed a celebrity status unmatched in her day.

She was also a dogged investigator with the instincts of a blood hound. After the Kennedy assassination, Kilgallen was first journalist to question the official narrative of a lone gunman. Indeed, she did so in her very next column posted one week after the assassination. On November 29, 1963, she wrote: “The case is closed is it? Well I’d like to know how in a big smart town like Dallas, a man like Jack Ruby, operator of a striptease honky tonk, could stroll in and out of police headquarters as if it were a health club at a time when a small army of law enforcers was keeping a ‘tight security guard’ on Oswald….That is why so many people are saying there is ‘something queer’ about the killing of Oswald, something strange about the way his case was handled, a great deal missing in the official account…”

Later, when Kilgallen attended the trial in Dallas of Jack Ruby she was the only journalist to be granted a private interview with the accused (on two occasions). This was at Ruby’s request. Apparently ‘What’s My Line?’ was one of Jack’s favorite TV shows. Kilgallen wrote that she stayed behind at the trial because she had been told Ruby wanted to talk. When Ruby’s co-counsel Joe Tonahill beckoned to her she went up to the defense table. Ruby rose and politely shook hands. She wrote that although he was smiling ‘the total effect was inexpressibly sad.’

Kilgallen described him in harrowing terms: ‘Ruby’s eyes were glassy and when we shook hands, his hand trembled in mine ever so slightly like the heartbeat of a bird. I’m nervous and worried, he told her. I feel I’m on the verge of something I don’t understand, the breaking point maybe. Ruby then told her he was ‘really scared.’ ( )

By one account, the presiding Judge Joe B. Brown allowed Ruby and Kilgallen (with Tonahill) to retire to chambers for an interview behind closed doors. Not even Ruby’s guards were present on this occasion. (Lee Israel, Kilgallen, 1979)

Jack Ruby never testified at his own trial. This was integral to defense attorney Marvin Belli’s strategy to portray him as ‘temporarily insane’ on the day of the killing. The strategy failed, however. Ruby was convicted. Even so, discrepancies emerged during the testimony of several witnesses indicating that the official narrative could not possibly be correct. For example, Ruby’s whereabouts at the time of the assassination raised a red flag. One witness testified that at the time Kennedy was shot Ruby was in the offices of the Dallas Morning News, located several blocks from Dealey Plaza. The office windows faced the Plaza with a direct line of sight to the Texas Book Depository. Did Ruby deliberately position himself to watch the assassination? If so, this meant he had prior knowledge. ( )

When I checked the layout of downtown Dallas using Google Earth Pro software I was able to measure the distance from the Dallas Morning News building to the location of the “kill zone” on Elm Street. The distance is 1,460 feet.

Other testimony revealed that Ruby was already shadowing (stalking?) Oswald on the evening of November 22 when the authorities presented the accused Oswald in hand-cuffs to the press at City Hall. The police assembly room was packed with reporters and photographers. Ruby was seen with a pen and pad in hand, behaving as if he were a member of the press which he was not.

From the questioning of other witnesses it also emerged that the shadowing continued the next day. On the afternoon of November 23, Ruby was seen on the third floor of City Hall, just outside the homicide department where Oswald was being interrogated. Ruby was in the hallway crowded with press. As before, he was pretending to be a reporter. But Ruby was well known at City Hall and one of the detectives yelled out, ‘Jack, what are you doing here?’ The detective had to shout to be heard because the corridor was crowded and noisy. Ruby gestured and replied, ‘I am helping all of these fellows.’ ( )

These discrepancies surely mean that Ruby’s encounter with Oswald did not happen by chance. Nor was the shooting an impulsive act. It was pre-meditated. The shadowing also undermines what Ruby told the Warren Commission, i.e., ‘No one else requested me to do anything. I never spoke to anyone about attempting to do anything. No subversive organization gave me any idea. No underworld persons made any effort to contact me. It all happened that Sunday morning…’

In March 1964, Kilgallen attempted to contact Robert Kennedy through Pierre Salinger who told Kennedy ‘she has some information she wants to turn over to you.’ The meeting never happened, however. During this difficult period RFK was dealing with his own grief and loss, and avoided contact with journalists, specially these investigating the murder of his brother. (David Talbot, Brothers, 2007, p. 262)

Many researchers have dismissed Jack Ruby’s trial as inconsequential, probably because Ruby never testified. But I suspect these skeptics have never studied the transcript of the trial in Dallas. Surely the trial convinced Kilgallen (in my view correctly) that Ruby was the key to figuring out who killed Kennedy.

This probably explains why in August 1964, about a month before the official release of the Warren Commission Report in September, Kilgallen leaked the entire transcript of Ruby’s three hours of testimony to the Commission. Somehow she had obtained a copy, 102 pages in length. Kilgallen serialized the entire transcript in three issues of The New York Journal-American. With the benefit of hindsight, it appears she leaked the transcript to draw attention to the Commission’s inept questioning of Ruby, but also, and more importantly, to shed light on the discrepancies exposed at his Dallas trial. The leak prompted J. Edgar Hoover to order a tap on Kilgallen’s phone. He also put her under surveillance.

Dorothy Kilgallen never revealed the details about her interviews with Jack Ruby. She planned to tell all in a forthcoming book, Murder One, to be published by Random House. Meanwhile, she kept her notes and manuscript on her person at all times. She told friends she was close to discovering who killed Kennedy. But Kilgallen did not live long enough to finish her book. On November 8, 1965, she was found dead in her Manhattan apartment. Her personal hairdresser Marc Sinclaire found the body and immediately concluded she had been murdered. Kilgallen was fully dressed, sitting up in a bed she never used, in a room she never slept in. The reported cause of death was a mix of alcohol and barbiturates, traces of which were found on the rim of a glass. Her manuscript and notes had disappeared.

But the plot against Kennedy was not simply a coup d’tat by a power hungry vice president, nor a move by the Jewish underworld to defend its drug trafficking empire. The stakes were infinitely higher, as I am about to show.


Ben Gurion and JFK

The last name on Madeleine Brown’s list I will discuss is John McCloy. But he is far from the least. When I saw his name I was stunned because of what this means. One need only Google ‘John J. McCloy’ to appreciate who this man was. Over a span of fifty years McCloy advised eight presidents from Franklin D. Roosevelt to Ronald Reagan, including John F. Kennedy.

Allow me to briefly review his storied career. As a young artillery officer, McCloy saw combat briefly during the last months of World War I. After the war he returned to Harvard and completed his law degree. During the 1920s-30s McCloy enjoyed a successful career as a Wall Street attorney. This phase of his life came to an end in 1940, however, when he was recruited by US Secretary of War Henry Stimson. McCloy served under Stimson throughout World War II as a war planner and on intelligence issues. During this period McCloy and James Donovan founded the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), forerunner of the CIA. After the war McCloy became president of the World Bank, then served as the first High Commissioner for Germany. In this capacity he oversaw the creation of the Federal Republic of Germany.

In the 1950s, McCloy served as chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank, was chairman of the Ford Foundation, and also a trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation. For many years, he also served as chairman of the prestigious Council on Foreign Relations. McCloy’s association with the Rockefellers went all the way back to his Harvard days. In short, McCloy’s remarkable resume indicates that by the 1950s he had reached the pinnacle of the US power establishment and was among the select group of men who rule America. He was one of the elite.

McCloy advised president Kennedy on disarmament and arms control issues. But it is of special relevance to this discussion that, in 1963, Kennedy recruited McCloy to be his personal envoy to the Mideast. The objective of his visit: to broker a deal with Israeli Prime Minister David Ben Gurion and arrange for US inspection of Israel’s Dimona nuclear reactor. At the time, only four nations possessed nuclear weapons and Kennedy wanted to keep it that way. Kennedy was alarmed by the growing likelihood that numerous other nations, including Israel, were about to join the ‘nuclear club.’ (Avner Cohen, Israel and the Bomb, 1998, p. 132)

Ben Gurion had promised Kennedy that the Dimona reactor was solely for peaceful purposes. When Kennedy met Shimon Peres at the White House Peres likewise assured him that Israel ‘will not be the first nation in the Middle East to introduce nuclear weapons.’ But what did this mean, really? US intelligence experts knew that the Dimona reactor was of French design and that Peres had personally arranged the technology transfer. Given Peres’ hawkish record Kennedy surely remained skeptical. US nuclear experts told Kennedy that a minimum of two inspections a year were needed to guarantee that the reactor would not be used to produce plutonium for nukes. And Ben Gurion’s offer of (maybe?) one visit a year fell short. (Israel and the Bomb, p. 118)

In mid-June 1963 McCloy arrived in Washington DC for three days of briefings with administration officials, after which he met with Kennedy. At this time JFK signed a strongly worded letter to Ben Gurion that was tantamount to an ultimatum. The showdown with the US that Ben Gurion had sought to avoid appeared imminent. (Israel and the Bomb, p. 156)

Suddenly, however, Ben Gurion resigned, probably a dodge to avoid having to respond to Kennedy’s ultimatum. This put the Dimona issue in limbo. Despite this, McCloy proceeded with the first leg of the planned diplomatic mission: to Egypt where he consulted with Abdul Nasser. The Egyptian president heard McCloy out but not surprisingly was non-committal. However, because of Israel’s failure to respond due to Ben Gurion’s resignation, Kennedy canceled the next leg of McCloy’s trip, to Tel Aviv. McCloy returned to Washington and within weeks the White House abandoned the initiative. The new prime minister Levi Eshkol was insisting that he needed more time to study Kennedy’s proposals.

Meanwhile, Kennedy’s proposed Partial Test Ban was gaining traction. JFK probably judged that the Dimona inspection matter could wait until later and refocused his efforts on this other no less important issue. As we know, Averell Harriman’s July 1963 mission to Moscow was successful. Late in July, the US and Soviets initialed an agreement to ban atmospheric nuclear tests. In September 1963, the US Senate ratified the treaty and within six months more than 100 nations acceded to it or signed it outright. The Partial Test Ban was a major achievement for Kennedy and for the world.


John McCloy shows his colors

Now we come to the dark side. As a Rockefeller man McCloy had many friends in the oil industry, including Clint Murchison. We know that during the summer of 1963 Murchison hosted McCloy at his Mexican hacienda ‘to hunt white wings.’ One can only imagine what these two powerful men discussed over steaks and drinks. (LBJ and the Kennedy Killing, p. 356)

McCloy’s subsequent attendance at the November 21, 1963 meeting at Murchison’s home in Dallas indicates that the “wise man” of Wall Street had decided to betray Kennedy and join the coup against rightful authority. McCloy was anything but a loose cannon. His involvement surely means that other members of the US elite knew about and supported the coming coup. David Rockefeller had already taken the unusual step of publishing a strongly worded letter in Life magazine critical of Kennedy’s economic policies.

It is fair to assume that McCloy briefed Murchison, LBJ and others about Kennedy’s blocked initiative to inspect the Dimona reactor. Although Kennedy later obtained an agreement from prime minister Eshkol for US inspections, his successor did not share Kennedy’s deep commitment to non-proliferation. LBJ was more than willing to look the other way.

There were inspections, yes, but not two a year. The minimum requirement had been abandoned. We also know that the Israelis fooled the US inspectors by installing a dummy control room complete with fake dials and phony data.

The US scientists thought the reactor was producing electricity when, in reality, it was geared up to maximize production of plutonium. Even as the inspectors conducted their walk-through the reactor was busily producing plutonium for bombs. The Israelis also deceived the inspectors another way, by bricking over the elevator doors to conceal the shafts to the clandestine separation plant six floors below ground. The fact they got away with all of this seems to have further emboldened them. On the occasion of the 1968 inspection, the Israelis became belligerent, harassing the US inspectors so openly and aggressively that the scientists terminated the visit. It was the last US inspection. Why bother anyway? US officials must have realized it was all a charade. (Mark H. Gaffney, Dimona: The Third Temple, 1989, p. 69)

On December 6, 1963, scarcely two weeks after Kennedy’s murder in Dallas, Johnson awarded John McCloy the Presidential Medal of Freedom for unspecified services to the country. A few days later, Johnson also picked McCloy to serve on the Warren Commission. In my opinion, these very public back-to-back gestures by Johnson were a signal to the US elite that the coup d’tat had been completed successfully. As we know, McCloy was a diligent participant in the Warren Commission ‘investigation’ and helped to promote the lone gunman narrative. ’Orwellian’ is the only word fit to describe this dark chapter in US history.

Today, there can be no doubt about McCloy’s views on US foreign policy. The record is clear. While at the World Bank McCloy cooperated with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to make aid to third world countries conditional on austerity measures to keep them dependent on the West and prevent them from developing their own economies. While at the Ford Foundation McCloy arranged for that supposed philanthropic institution to secretly funnel CIA monies for covert operations. In March 1964, McCloy helped orchestrate the CIA coup that overthrew the popularly elected and non-communist president of Brazil, Joao Goulart. To sum up, McCloy was a neo-colonialist and no less of a scoundrel than Lyndon Johnson. (Donald Gibson, Battling Wall Street, 1994, p. 71-72, 79; also see William Blum, Killing Hope, 1995, p.163 – 169)

Finally, I need to add a clarification. Although Richard M. Nixon was also on Brown’s list, Republican political operative and author Roger Stone knew Nixon personally and interviewed him. Stone says Nixon left the party at Murchison’s long before Johnson arrived, and so, was not a part of the plot to kill Kennedy. In light of this, I have taken the liberty of dropping Nixon’s name from Brown’s list. Otherwise, Stone reached the same conclusion as Tague about who killed JFK. No doubt, Nixon, a savvy politician, eventually figured out on his own what had happened and who was responsible. (The Man Who Killed Kennedy, p. 229)

Based on my research, I suspect Madeleine Brown may also have been mistaken about one other name, Clint Peoples. The issue needs more vetting.

In a subsequent article I will show that Lyndon Johnson was a staunch Zionist.




Mark H. Gaffney is the author of Dimona: The Third Temple (1989), Gnostic Secrets of the Naassenes (2004), The 9/11 Mystery Plane and the Vanishing of America (2008), Black 9/11 (2nd ed, 2016), and his latest, Deep History and the Ages of Man (2022). Mark can be reached for comment at












more fire......

 Murder of Anti-Vietnam War Monk Thomas Merton in 1968 Was a CIA Hit Linked with Assassinations of JFK, RFK and MLK, New Book Argues



By Phillip F. Nelson Famous Black Like Me author John Howard Griffin, who was recruited under CIA’s Operation Mockingbird, appears to have played an important role in the cover-up

For five decades, the circumstances of the sudden death of the famed anti-Vietnam War monk Thomas Merton have remained cloaked in the confusion of assorted stories having very little commonality, except for the most basic facts of date and place. 

The date—December 10, 1968—and place—in a cottage located at a Red Cross conference center near Bangkok, Thailand—are about the only undisputed points of yet another death of a hero in that very violent year.  Even the time of death, approximately 2:00 p.m. local time, was disputed by the police report, a fake witness statement and biographer Michael Mott—all stating the time was one hour later.

Everything else about the circumstances of Merton’s death depends upon the version told by those who had any familiarity with it, a result of the absence of an autopsy and the rapidity of how his body was removed by the U.S. Army, embalmed, and flown back to the United States on a military aircraft also transporting other casualties of the Vietnam War being fought nearby. The presence of Father Louis (as Merton was known in the monastery) on that plane, among the bodies of soldiers, sailors and Marines killed in a war which he had long opposed, added even more irony to the mystery surrounding his death.

Authors Hugh Turley and David Martin, in their 2018 book, The Martyrdom of Thomas Merton, have effectively deconstructed nearly all of the assertions of Brother Patrick Hart (Merton’s secretary at the Kentucky abbey regarding the scene he described).

Not only was there no evidence that Merton had taken a shower, or collapsed into a disheveled pile onto the floor, a large cut and contusion on the back of his head was not noted at all, and photographs taken immediately after his death—which had been kept virtually hidden for 49 years—show that his body was lying perfectly straight, with his arms lying beside his body, just as it might be placed into a coffin.

Furthermore, their own intensive investigation into the matter—it soon becomes clear that indeed, it was the only such honest and thorough examination ever done, even though limited to the few remaining artifacts—led them to make the following series of assertions [p. 267]:

  • The best evidence indicates beyond any serious doubt that Merton was murdered.
  • The story that a fan killed Merton is so preposterous that a series of fantastic stories have had to be invented to make it believable.
  • We can point a finger at the most likely suspect in Merton’s murder cover-up, Brother Patrick Hart notwithstanding, and that is the CIA. The CIA had the motive, and they had the means.  When Penn Jones and others would make a connection between Merton’s death and that of the Kennedy brothers and Martin Luther King they were not just blowing smoke. All four of those people were obstacles to the CIA’s war ambitions in Southeast Asia, a war that was raging right next door to the scene of Merton’s death.

Only a full reading of the book, as Turley and Martin untangle the points noted above and many more fragmented pieces of a puzzle purposefully muddled from the start, will lead to a full understanding of how thoroughly his death had been mishandled.

That undeniable fact is yet another marker for how the assassinations of John and Robert Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Thomas Merton are inexorably linked: In every case, their murders and the cover-ups were characterized with replicated patterns of deceit, including fabricated or missing evidence, fundamental inconsistencies in witness testimonies, faked documents and even—in Merton’s case—a Thai police report that is undated and unsigned.

As the authors also point out, among the strongest evidence that Merton’s death was a CIA hit was the failure of the American news media to perform their constitutional function of ferreting out what should be obvious cases of governmental misconduct. The mainstream media have conformed to the stories set forth by John Howard Griffin and the journalist John Moffitt in his book about the conference, A New Charter for Monasticism, and the “official” biography, The Seven Mountains of Thomas Merton, by Michael Mott.

In all cases, they called the death an accidental electrocution, caused by a faulty fan. In their first book, authors Turley and Martin categorically rejected that and provided detailed explanations for why they view it as impossible, which for our purposes will be summarized without going into the detail uniquely provided by their book.

For inexplicable, but perhaps understandable, reasons, the leadership of Merton’s home base, The Abbey of Gethsemani, in Trappist, Kentucky, picked the famed Texas journalist John Howard Griffin to write Merton’s biography. (As it will become clear shortly, the authors’ new book, reviewed below, completes the circle, proving beyond reasonable doubt that it was indeed the result of the deeds of a malicious and murderous abbot, in charge of the monastery at which Thomas Merton spent his hermitage.)

Both Griffin and his old boyhood friend Penn Jones had worked in military intelligence during World War II. In the 1960s Jones became a journalist and newspaper publisher in his small town of Midlothian, Texas, and became a first-generation leader of JFK researchers. Certain other long-time researchers have questioned whether he might have continued to have close contact with military intelligence personnel as an “undercover and confidential informer.”

In Griffin’s case, the fact that he had attained fame as a popular author automatically made him a target for recruitment by the CIA for its Operation Mockingbird; that program, beginning in the early 1950s, had successfully put hundreds of syndicated columnists, news reporters, radio and television broadcasters and popular authors within its orbit (including many authors who may have started in non-fiction but quickly converted to the fictional genre after being recruited—William Bradford Huie is exhibit “A” in that category, as demonstrated herehere and here).


Evidently, desperate to bring finality to an official, albeit false, narrative of Merton’s death being a freak accident by electrocution, caused by a Hitachi fan that had suddenly become mis-wired, Griffin called on his old friend, newspaperman Penn Jones to come to Thailand to investigate the incident and pronounce his findings.

That sudden trip, in and of itself, is most curious, considering that Jones was not a wealthy man and most reports indicated that he ran his weekly newspaper on a very small budget.  Why he would suddenly decide to fly off to the Philippines and Thailand and then agree with Griffin’s decision that the death was merely a “freak accident”—but not bother to report that formally, or even write a column about it in his newspaper or, evidently, anywhere else, simply adds more to the mystery. 

That enigma over-wraps even more riddles when one considers that Penn Jones was closely connected to numerous people who did not share his purported views on the subject of JFK’s assassination being the product of a highly placed conspiracy. The obvious counterpoint to that, however, might be that—especially in that time and place—he might not have had many other friendship choices if he had limited them to people having similar opinions to his own.

Using Jones’s contemporary reputation as a harsh critic of the Warren Commission’s findings of “no conspiracy” in the JFK assassination, Griffin’s apparent presumption was that Jones’s finding that Merton’s death was accidental would help finalize the “verdict” of accidental death. 


Hugh Turley’s and David Martin’s latest book, Thomas Merton’s Betrayers—The Case Against Abbot James Fox and Author John Howard Griffin, is a “sequel”—but in this rare case, one that is even better than their original, the 2018 book, The Martyrdom of Thomas Merton. That classic book turns out to be merely a prelude for the new book, which is a much deeper dive into the reasons behind “why” a decision was made by men—purportedly the leadership of monks within the monastery (James Fox)—to kill their own spiritual “messenger.”









JFK update....

Two weeks ago I published an article on Prof. Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University, prompted by some of his recent public remarks.

During one of his regular weekly interviews on Andrew Napolitano’s podcast, he had briefly stated that the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy had been the result of a conspiracy involving elements of the CIA. He went on to suggest that the killing might have been “the most decisive event in modern American history” and wondered whether any of our subsequent presidents had been anything more than mere “factotums of the system,” completely subject to the powerful hidden groups that actually control our society.

Such sentiments would hardly be uncommon within fringe, conspiratorial circles, but in sixty years I do not think they have ever been publicly expressed by an individual of Prof. Sachs’ elite establishment stature, and others shared my opinion.

A dozen years ago I had discovered that since the early 1990s a prominent progressive academic I know had been absolutely convinced that the JFK assassination had indeed been engineered by those sinister forces, but he had always carefully kept those views to himself. He now told me he was shocked by Sachs’ public courage on the matter, although even a year before he had already been tremendously impressed by Sachs’ remarkable candor: “no question he’s the most important public intellectual we have.”

That previous endorsement had been prompted by some of Sachs’ earlier statements on other matters. As chairman of the Covid Commission, Sachs had declared that the virus responsible for killing more than a million Americans and perhaps another twenty million worldwide had almost certainly been produced in a biolab, while he denounced the U.S. government for desperately working to conceal those facts. After the 2022 outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine war, Sachs had explained that the underlying cause had been the 2014 American overthrow of the democratically-elected Ukrainian government and the years of NATO provocations against Russia that followed, with all of these dangerous policies being a result of the unbroken stranglehold that the Neocons had enjoyed over our country’s foreign policy for more than thirty years. And on Bloomberg TV, he stated that America had obviously destroyed the Nord Stream pipelines, Europe’s most important civilian energy infrastructure, thereby committing the greatest act of industrial terrorism in world history.

In late 2022 these developments had led me to publish an article on the remarkably outspoken Columbia University scholar, and since that time all his activities have further strengthened my verdict. All of us can say whatever we like on a corner of the Internet, but I emphasized that when a figure of very high international standing takes that same position, the impact is considerably different:

Until just a few months ago, I doubt there were many American academics more solidly situated in the topmost ranks of our elite mainstream establishment than Prof. Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University.

In 1983 he gained Harvard University tenure at the remarkably young age of 28, then spent the next 19 years as a professor at that august academic institution; by the early 1990s the New York Times was already hailing him as the world’s most important figure in his field. Lured to Columbia University in 2002, he has spent the last couple of decades teaching there and also directing a couple of its research organizations, most recently the Center for Sustainable Development. TIME Magazine has twice ranked him among the world’s 100 most influential individuals, and for nearly twenty years he served as Special Advisor to several Secretary-Generals of the United Nations, while publishing many hundreds of articles and op-eds on a wide variety of subjects in our most influential media outlets.

It would be difficult to construct a more illustrious and establishmentarian curriculum vitae for an international academic figure…

Although he has retained the subdued manner and careful phraseology of a mild academic, in recent months the incendiary content of his published articles and his public statements have exploded across the global landscape, reaching many millions who might otherwise never have questioned what they were so uniformly being told by all our mainstream media organs. His critics defending that orthodoxy must surely believe that he has gone dangerously rogue, and given the enormous weight of his past credibility, I suspect that the phrase “rogue elephant” has sometimes entered their thoughts.


Last month, Napolitano took a short break from his show to speak at a Vatican conference on the teachings of St. Thomas Aquinas, and after his return he thanked Sachs for having arranged that invitation. Sachs himself had also attended as a speaker, and Napolitano expressed his amazement that the American economist had been greeted with such admiring recognition by the Roman Catholic cardinals who attended, almost suggesting that they had treated him as a conquering hero.

Sachs’ influence is hardly confined to those Princes of the Church. A central element of the West’s power is its overwhelming control over the global media infrastructure, whose continual stream of propaganda shapes the ideas and beliefs of most of the world’s population, even including political leaders, multi-billionaires, and influential celebrities. A handful of publications sit at the apex of that media hierarchy, with the Economist certainly being one of these, and given the dramatic recent decline in quality of the New York Times, that former publication might now possibly even rank as first among equals. Since 2015, the top Economist editor has been Zanny Minton Beddoes, whose first job out of college was working as a young assistant to Sachs during his highly successful early 1990s restructuring of Poland’s post-Communist economy. Although I know nothing of their relationship, I assume she spent most of the last three decades filled with admiration for her early former mentor, and if so, she must surely take his highly controversial remarks of the last couple of years quite seriously, even if she understands that they cannot possibly be mentioned in print.

Sachs’ personal background includes some memorable events. In a couple of his discussions on the roots of the Ukraine conflict, he recalled that in 1991 he was seated in a room discussing economic policy with Russia’s top leadership when all of them were suddenly informed that the Soviet Union had officially been dissolved, allowing him to experience a historical moment shared by few if any other Americans.

Over the last few months, he has been extremely outspoken in his denunciation of Israel’s ongoing slaughter of tens of thousands of helpless civilians in Gaza, even declaring that Israel was controlled by “a criminal government,” and he had regularly emphasized the need for international organizations to take public action on the matter. Soon afterward, South Africa successfully charged Israel with genocide before the International Court of Justice, whose distinguished jurists affirmed those accusations in a series of near-unanimous rulings. Although I have no evidence, I suspected at the time that Sachs may have used his extensive network of influential global connections to help set that legal project into motion.

I’ve also noticed that despite Sachs’ extremely outspoken public statements, none of those groups and organizations that so fiercely monitor political speech in America have dared to publicly attack him. I think they realize that his international stature is simply too great and any such failed attacks would merely make them look weak and ineffective.


After publishing that recent article, I assumed that many months would pass before I would directly focus again on Sachs and his work, but I was quickly proven wrong.

No sooner had my piece appeared than I discovered that Sachs had been interviewed by Piers Morgan, a British former cable TV host of decidedly mainstream sentiments, with such an appearance representing a significant media breakthrough. In their exchange, Morgan demonstrated that he had been living entirely within the cocoon of our official narrative regarding Russia, Ukraine, and Gaza, and was deeply ignorant of the important facts that Sachs brought to his attention. But much more importantly, those facts were also probably surprising to many of the half-million viewers who watched that discussion on Youtube, thereby perhaps helping to shift some of them in a different direction.