Friday, November 22, 2013
The Kennedy Assassination (November 22, 1963) 50 Years Later
Paul Craig Roberts
November 22, 2013
November 22, 2013, is the 50th anniversary of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. The true story of JFK’s murder has never been officially admitted, although the conclusion that JFK was murdered by a plot involving the Secret Service, the CIA, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff has been well established by years of research, such as that provided by James W. Douglass in his book, JFK And The Unspeakable, published by Simon & Schuster in 2008. Ignore Douglass’ interest in the Trappist monk Thomas Merton and Merton’s prediction and focus on the heavily documented research that Douglass provides.
Or just turn to the contemporary films, taken by tourists watching JFK’s motorcade that are available on YouTube, which show clearly the Secret Service pulled from President Kennedy’s limo just prior to his assassination, and the Zapruder film that shows the killing shot to have come from President Kennedy’s right front, blowing off the back of his head, not from the rear as postulated in the Warren Commission Report, which would have pushed his head forward, not rearward.
I am not going to write about the assassination to the extent that the massive information permits. Those who want to know already know. Those who cannot face the music will never be able to confront the facts regardless of what I or anyone else writes or reveals.
To briefly review, the facts are conclusive that JFK was on terrible terms with the CIA and the Joint Chiefs. He had refused to support the CIA organized Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba. He had rejected the Joint Chiefs’ “Operation Northwoods,” a plan to commit real and faked acts of violence against Americans, blame Castro and use the false flag events to bring regime change to Cuba. He had rejected the Joint Chiefs case that the Soviet Union should be attacked while the US held the advantage and before the Soviets could develop delivery systems for nuclear weapons. He had indicated that after his reelection he was going to pull US troops out of Vietnam and that he was going to break the CIA into a thousand pieces. He had aroused suspicion by working behind the scenes with Khrushchev to defuse the Cuban Missile Crisis, leading to claims that he was “soft on communism.” The CIA and Joint Chiefs’ belief that JFK was an unreliable ally in the war against communism spread into the Secret Service.
It has been established that the original autopsy of JFK’s fatal head wound was discarded and a faked one substituted in order to support the official story that Oswald shot JFK from behind. FBI director J. Edgar Hoover and President Johnson knew that Oswald was the CIA’s patsy, but they also understood, as did members of the Warren Commission, that to let the true story out would cause Americans to lose confidence in their own government at the height of the Cold War.
Robert Kennedy knew what had happened. He was on his way to being elected president and to holding the plotters accountable for the murder of his brother when the CIA assassinated him. A distinguished journalist, who was standing behind Robert Kennedy at the time of his assassination, told me that the killing shots came from behind past his ear. He submitted his report to the FBI and was never contacted.
Acoustic experts have conclusively demonstrated that more shots were fired than can be accounted for by Sirhan Sirhan’s pistol and that the sounds indicate two different calibers of firearms.
I never cease to be amazed by the gullibility of Americans, who know nothing about either event, but who confidently dismiss the factual evidence provided by experts and historians on the basis of their naive belief that “the government wouldn’t lie about such important events” or “someone would have talked.” What good would it do if someone talked when the gullible won’t believe hard evidence?
by Larry Simons
November 22, 2013
As with any other important anniversary of a historical event that possesses the magnitude of the JFK assassination, the media and the corporate-controlled networks have a field day with inundating us all with documentaries and specials that claim to have never before seen footage or computer analysis showing so-called "experts" who claim that with new computer technology, they can put to rest all the "theories" surrounding the event. In the case of the JFK assassination, these "experts" claim they can prove once and for all Oswald acted alone in killing President John F. Kennedy On November 22, 1963.
In most, if not in all cases, the sole purpose of these computer analysis reenactments is to spread disinformation.
One example of this is the 2003 BBC documentary Beyond Conspiracy. This particular film cannot be embedded into my story because the embed feature was disabled by the publisher of the video on YouTube. The publisher also disabled the comment section [so no one can post comments under the video]. Hmmmm, I wonder why. Here is the link to the video.
The film begins examining the single/magic bullet theory at 1:16:14 into the film. A clip is played from Oliver Stone's 1991 film JFK in which Jim Garrison [played by Kevin Costner] is demonstrating to the court how the magic bullet theory would have to work [if it was true]. Costner is seen in the clip saying that the bullet at one point hangs in mid-air and at another point zig-zags left and right. The documentary stops the JFK clip and then shows a computer simulation of the assassination where the narrator is heard saying, "The single bullet that struck Kennedy and Connally did not hang in mid-air. It did not zig-zag right and left. It went straight through the president and into the governor."
It becomes clear that the makers of the documentary either did not watch the entire courtroom scene in JFK or they did and they are purposely espousing disinformation. When Costner's character demonstrates the magic bullet theory in the film, he is not supporting the theory. In fact, just the opposite. He is demonstrating how absurd it is, not only for the Warren Commission to take it seriously, but for people to even believe it.
Garrison [Costner] is showing the people in the courtroom how insane it is to believe that a bullet would hang in mid-air and then zig-zag left and right and make multiple wounds on not one but two different people. The BBC film, in my opinion, purposely shows Costner's magic bullet theory demonstration entirely out of context, only showing the portion of the film in which Costner is reenacting the supposed path of the bullet, while completely omitting the 17 seconds of the film prior to this scene that shows Costner telling the people in the courtroom the magic bullet theory is a gigantic lie. The dialogue the BBC omitted by Costner was this line:
"But rather to admit to a conspiracy, or investigate further, the Warren Commission chose to endorse the theory put forth by an ambitious junior counselor Arlen Spector, one of the grossest lies ever forced on the American people. We've come to know it as the magic bullet theory."
Here is the full clip from JFK. Had the BBC documentary included this full clip, their entire segment on the magic bullet theory [in which they chopped up the magic bullet theory scene from JFK to give the false impression that Costner's character was supporting the magic bullet theory] would have been plain for all to see that the BBC was blatantly lying.
The reality is, when the BBC documentary makes the statement, "The single bullet that struck Kennedy and Connally did not hang in mid-air. It did not zig-zag right and left. It went straight through the president and into the governor", they are actually agreeing with Oliver Stone. Either the makers of the BBC documentary are knowingly spreading disinformation in their film, or they were simply too lazy to watch the entire scene and were unaware that just 17 seconds prior to the scene they did include from JFK in their documentary, the main character [Costner] called the single bullet theory a lie. My guess is both, with more emphasis on the former.
Stunts like this come as no shock to real investigative reporters [such as Jim Marrs], because when the facts are not on your side and your goal is to push a particular agenda in order to divert attention away from events that actually happened, you would have no choice but to purposely and knowingly deceive.
At 1:17:24 in the BBC documentary, the narrator says this, "There was nothing magic about this bullet at all", then begins talking about the condition of the bullet. The narrator says, "In Stone's film it's referred to as the pristine bullet. There's no way, the Stone film says, the bullet could have caused so many wounds and emerged virtually unmarked."
Once again, the BBC film is agreeing with Stone. In the film JFK, Costner is ridiculing the magic bullet theory and clearly demonstrating that it is impossible for one bullet to make so many twists and turns and make seven wounds on two different people and then exit their bodies in pristine condition. When Costner tells the court in the film that the bullet ended up in pristine condition, he is pointing out how absurd this is. A bullet would not end up in pristine condition. This is why Costner tells the court:
"The Army wound ballistic experts at Edward arsenal, fired some comparison bullets. Not one of them looked anything like this [holding up the pristine bullet]. Take a look at CE-856. An identical bullet...fired through the wrist of a human cadaver. Just one of the bones smashed by the magic bullet. Seven wounds gentlemen. Tough skin, dense bones. This single bullet explanation is the foundation of the Warren Commission's claim of a lone assassin. And once you conclude the magic bullet could not create all seven wounds, you have to conclude that there was a fourth shot and a second rifleman. And if there was a second rifleman, then by definition, there had to be a conspiracy."
The BBC documentary wants you to believe Stone's film was supporting the magic bullet theory when it was actually ridiculing its immense absurdity by pointing out that similar pristine bullets that were fired through human cadavers exited the bodies badly damaged when it only created one wound, through the wrist. The Warren Commission wants us all to believe that a bullet can inflict seven wounds through two bodies and exit those bodies in immaculate condition.
Beyond Conspiracy was basically telling its viewers this: Don't believe that bullshit in Oliver Stone's movie. It's a pack of lies, despite the fact that the exact same thing our film is calling absurd, Stone is also calling absurd. We just purposely omitted the scenes from JFK in our film that clearly show that Stone's view is also our view so that we could call Stone a nut.
I could not even believe what I was hearing and watching during this segment. I did not watch the entire film, but it would stand to reason that if the makers of the BBC film went through this much trouble to blatantly lie just in this single segment, there are no doubt many more nuggets of disinformation throughout this film.