Showing posts with label Katzenbach memo. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Katzenbach memo. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 30, 2014

The U.S. Hangs Onto To Its "North Korea Dunnit" Malarkey - Why Be Surprised?

Randall Park as Kim Jong-un, as his head explodes in 'The Interview, and Jeremy Renner as doomed journalist Gary webb in 'Kill t
Left:Little Kim after being head shot and just before his head is exploded by CIA assassins in 'The Interview' - which lap dog patrons have paid good money to cheer and say the 'Pledge of Allegiance' to before watching. Who are they allegiant to, murderers? Or are they just ordinary jingoistic assholes? Right:  Jeremy Renner stars as journalist Gary Webb in 'Kill the Messenger' - a worthwhile film all REAL Americans ought to see.

The U.S. appears to be sticking to the "North Korea dunnit" line despite all signs pointing to an enclave of hackers belonging to a group called 'The Guardians of Peace'.   Every indicator shows the malware and other attributes were deliberately employed as decoys to set up the North Koreans. Far fetched? Hell no, especially not when there's a sordid history of this country setting up decoys in order to take the heat off the real perps.

You need look no further than how Lee Harvey Oswald was set up just over 51 years ago in the Kennedy assassination. The CIA, desperate not to leave its fingerprints on the assassination, made sure to paint Oswald as a lunatic commie loner - complete with purchased useless weapon - in order to target the Soviet Union and Cuba. The original plan was to make it look like a commie plot to justify attacking Russia and Cuba.  But even then there were savvy journalists, like Newsweek's Kenneth Crawford, that didn't buy it. It was too easy, too pat and besides, as Crawford observed in his column a week after the assassination: "How explain the irony of a lone pro-Castro gunman being fingered in a city - Dallas- that is a Right Wing citadel?"

How indeed! But when agendas are afoot - especially launched by an agency of one's own government, anything is possible.

Yesterday, according to Politico the FBI was briefed on the alternate but much more credible theory that unknown hackers set the North Koreans up.  Especially noteworthy, that at least one Sony insider - a former employee- played a major role in engineering the hack.

Rather than the U.S. government, then, most savvy in the know people are turning to experts like Norse, a Silicon Valley cyber security firm. Also, the FBI wanted to know from Norse who it thought was behind the attack on Sony Pictures.

Kurt Stammberger a senior Vice President at Norse, had already informed CBS News in an interview a week earlier that "all signs indicated the attack was an inside job". As the Norse VP put it:

"There are certainly North Korean fingerprints on this, but when we run all of those leads to ground they turn out to be decoys or red herrings."

He added that Norse's own investigation points to a woman who calls herself "Lena". According to Stammberger, this Lena worked at Sony Los Angeles for ten years until leaving the company in May. As he explains:

"This woman was in precisely the right position and had the deep technical background to locate the specific servers that were compromised."

Despite all this, the State Dept. said Monday it "had no plans to change its position", adding "we are confident that North Korea is responsible for this destructive attack and we stand by that conclusion"

And why wouldn't they - given that State is still loaded with Neocons, and they were instrumental (especially State harpy Victoria Nuland) in ratcheting up the Ukraine crisis back in the spring - by spurring on the unrest in Kiev?  These Neocons in State already have an agenda to stir up the trouble pot so why not here too?

Backing up my contention is the take of cyber-security expert Hector Monsegur who noted on CBS:

"There wasn't enough time to do an investigation, looking at all the attack vectors, looking at all the logs."

In other words, the government's conclusion on who orchestrated the attack came far too soon, exactly parallel to the gov't modus operandi in the Warren Commission Report - finding Lee Oswald guilty  even before the Commission formally commenced (Google "Katzenbach memo") despite the fact all signs pointed to Lee being an obvious decoy, a patsy.

According to Monsegur:

"North Korea would not be able to handle such a massive amount of information, going into it from an external source - without raising any red flags. "

Skeptics like me point to not only the short length of time the FBI took to draw its conclusion (again, similar to what they did under J. Edgar Hoover in the Kennedy assassination case) but also the malware used in the attack which use by N. Korea is not exclusive. It's used around the world, including the U.S. in its Stuxnet worm.

So who are you going to believe, the government - with an obvious agenda- or objective security experts like Kurt Stammberger and Victor Monsegur? Given the government's hideous record in concealing the truth - including in past bogus whitewash investigations, I choose to believe the experts - who are in the business of detecting the cyber-leaks and tracing them to the actual perps as opposed to decoys.

See also:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/gary-leupp/60239/a-straightforward-chronology-of-the-sony-hacking-incident

Excerpt:

"The U.S. government, including the security apparatus and the State Department, have a long history of bald-faced lies, and the corporate media has a long history of taking its talking points from the State Department. I don’t even want to waste time reprising the litany of lies that accompanied the preparations for the criminal assault on Iraq. Anyone paying attention knows what happened."

And:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/robert-parry/60251/the-victory-of-perception-management


Thursday, November 14, 2013

Frequently Asked Questions on the JFK Assassination (4b): The Warren Commission (Cont'd)

What sort of questions did the Commission ask?

Questions for which the Commission was present include the following categories (Brown,  op. cit,, p281):

Preliminaries -         805   (2.1%)
To the point  -        1,537  (4.1%)
Not vital     -       16,073  (43.3%)
Clarification -        7,354  (19.8%)
Leading/hearsay        9,676  (26.0%)
Conclusionary -          922   (2.4%)
Foregone conclusion      323   (0.80%)
Nonsense      -          407   (1.09%)

The category basic definitions are (op. cit, p279):

'Preliminaries' - introductory questions re: background, education, job, family life, etc

'To the point' - Questions materially contributing to investigation

'Not vital' - Questions that "add nothing to the record"

'Clarification' - Questions clarifying earlier answers.

'Leading/hearsay' - 'Questions' in which witnesses were told the 'answers' in advance - then merely asked a series of yes/no questions about them

'Conclusionary' - Questions calling on witness to draw a conclusion.


'Forgone conclusion' - questions that "reflected the official version yet could not be substantiated by the witness" .

'Nonsense' - self-explanatory (i.e. Do you believe in UFOs?)

Most appalling is that the 'to the point' category comprised an insignificant 4.1 % of the total for which the Commissioners were present. For the percentage of all the questions asked - with or without the Commissioners present, that went up a 'mighty' three tenths of a point, to 4.4% (op.cit., p281). Thus, despite the motif of ponderous research, it is doubtful that this 'Report' - couched in its magnificent and portentous 26 volumes of body, approaches the investigative level of those books blithely dismissed as 'buff'.


Who were not asked questions?


200 witnesses- "each with knowledge at least as valuable as that given by the 488 commission witnesses" were not asked questions. These included:

Tom Alyea (who allegedly first filmed the sniper's 'nest'),

Charles A. Crenshaw (Parkland surgical resident at the time - who observed the massive rear head wound)

 Julia Ann Mercer, (who observed Jack Ruby driving a pickup with a rifle near the Triple Underpass)

William Harper (who found the occipital bone fragment behind the limo, on Elm St.);

 Guy Banister (who ran the 544 Camp St. office in New Orleans from which Oswald distributed leaflets);

Joseph Milteer (the right wing zealot who had been taped by an FBI informant in Miami predicting a  sniper shooting from an office bldg. - given "clean bill of health"  by FBI' (Brown, op. cit.,p383);

Sergio Archacha Smith,  likely suspect in the Walker shooting, in Dallas

Mary Moorman, took a number of photos at the instant of the head shot, and confronted by the FBI which confiscated them.

Aquilla Clemons (who observed the Tippitt shooting, and saw another man - not Oswald, doing it);

Pvt. Gordon Arnold (who was standing on the grass in front of the knoll's picket fence when a percussion from a shot made him hit the dirt - he was later sent to Alaska by the Army);

 Orville Nix - who took the Nix film, from the opposite side of Elm Street

Mary Muchmore, whose original film was cut/mutilated on return, at the instant of the head shot ( 'The Killing of a President', 1994: Groden, R.J., Viking Penguin. p. 37)

Richard Case Nagell-   Double agent, "so concerned with having an alibi for November 22, that he fired a pistol at a ceiling in a bank so as to be in jail" (Brown , p387).


The full list of all 200 witnesses not asked questions by the Warren Commission is given in Brown, 'Treachery In Dallas',  (pp381-89)


What was the Katzenbach Memo, and what has it to do with the Warren Commission?

This was a memo written to Bill Moyers, dated 25 November, 1963. Many conspiracy researchers  believe that it set the tone and the 'primary directive' for the Warren Commission's agenda - to find for the 'lone nut' at all costs. The most germane part to this discussion is:

"It is important that all facts surrounding President Kennedy's assassination be made public in a way which will satisfy people in the United States and abroad that all the facts have been told and that a statement to this effect be made now.

1. The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin, that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial. "

To the conspiracy thinker, the above enumerated first part of the memo provides enough evidence to disclose what the true purpose of any 'formal' or 'official' investigation would be: to arrive at a
preconceived and pre-accepted conclusion that was politically and socially expedient, rather than an outcome of an open-ended, genuine investigation. This also goes under the rubric of a fundamental logical no-no called 'Affirming the consequent' - i.e. affirming ab initio that which you need to prove. Taking the shortcut - avoiding the process, more: ensuring the outcome of the process blends with one's own 'truth'.  A much more acceptable version for public consumption. Expediency.

A multitude of Commission actions confirm their adherence to this misbegotten directive, including (but not limited to) their over-weaning reliance on a highly dubious 'witnesses' (e. g. Howard
Brennan) to the exclusion of others (e.g. Arnold Rowland) - not to mention those with direct knowledge of events who were not called (see partial list given earlier). The very list of those not called totally exposes all pretense toward objectivity claimed by either the Commission, or its apologists. Indeed, it discloses that a 'rubber stamping' expedition was under way, probably from the time of the Katzenbach memo (at least the planning of how the charade would
progress).

The Memo goes on:

"2-Speculation about Oswald's motivation ought to be cut off, and we should have some basis for rebutting any thought this  was a Communist conspiracy or (as the Iron Curtain press is saying) a right wing conspiracy to blame it on the Communists. Unfortunately, the facts on Oswald seem too pat - too obvious (Marxist, Cuba, Russian wife, etc). The Dallas police have put out statements on the Communist conspiracy theory, and it was they who were in charge when he was shot and thus
silenced
.

3- The matter has been handled thus far with neither dignity nor conviction. Facts have been mixed with rumor and speculation. We can scarcely let the world see us totally in the image of the Dallas police when our President is murdered."


This section of the memo is likely referencing the Commission's fears (pushed by right wing sources, mainly) that a Castro-Soviet backed communist conspiracy was afoot.  The fear was reinforced after the Commission was informed  by CIA head Richard Helms  of the Kostikov -Department Thirteen connection ("Department Thirteen" was that KGB Section assigned to assassinations) . Earl Warren evidently became so spooked that he felt the only alternative to a possible nuclear  confrontation  was to find for the lone assassin theory. From then, all evidence, documents and tests became devoted to nailing Oswald as the lone perp, which accounts for (1) of the Katzenbach memo.. It was either that or find him a KGB- hired contract killer, which many (including LBJ) felt would have led to war.

Clearly, Katzenbach himself is skeptical of the Russian conspiracy theory, as noted in the Memo, Section 2.("the facts on Oswald seem too pat", etc.) Careful reading of his words indicates he is decidedly more aggrieved at the Dallas Police Dept., as it was they that began circulating the communist conspiracy theory, but also in their custody Oswald was killed, and by a character - Jack Ruby - well known to the DPD and who often treated them to drinks and 'winks' (of the Strippers) at his bar, The Carousel Club.. Thus, even Katzenbach realizes that the facts -as given, do not add up.

Yet, despite this clear recognition, and rightful skepticism, this second highest prosecutor of the land, is prepared to commit himself to paper saying "the public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin" etc.  In other words to flout the essence of justice in this country, by finding a man guilty even before being brought to trial

Why not dissent more boldly and declare the need for a truly objective Commission process, as opposed to a Kangaroo court sideshow and whitewash? Probably because the threat of LBJ blackmail hung over him, to coerce him to conform, as it hung over Earl Warren and god knows how many others.


The Memo is used by some as a proof that Oswald didn't do it. No?

It cannot be used as 'proof' one way or the other. However, it shows an implicit directive to overlook any evidence pointing to suspicious others named by witnesses, apart from Oswald.  In other words, it is a revelation of an ideal cover for those who might actually have been involved, whether Katzenbach intended it to be such or not. It is a sordid revelation, in other words, of blatant prejudice - as opposed to the appearance of a full and open inquiry which the Warren Commission sought to portray.

At worst, this memo indicates a conspiracy to convict Oswald, which is not the same as a conspiracy to kill Kennedy.  If the existence of the memo is indicative of a conspiracy to frame Oswald (he couldn't be 'convicted' because this wasn't an actual trial) then it is ipso facto also indicative of a conspiracy to protect those who actually did kill Kennedy. Else, why try to set up Oswald by so consistently by selectively refuting anything that might point the other way? This is the $64,000 question any serious dissenter must address and answer honestly without obfuscation, spin or the usual distractive tactics ('change the topic if the going gets too hot'). I have yet to see a single coherent statement or response in which dissenters deal with the Katzenbach memo in a forthright and honest  manner.

Did J. Edgar Hoover play any role in the Warren Commission?

It appears that he supported the propaganda circulated in the Katzenbach Memo, as Mark North notes ('Act of Treason', p392):

"Before JFK's casket reached Andrews Air Force Base and Oswald is charged with anything, Hoover is asserting in writing that Oswald is guilty."

Hoover also conveyed instructions to Dallas Attorney  Shanklin to 'sanitize' Oswald's files, thereby cleansing them of any FBI affiliations (ibid.).  (Researchers believe this was important since Oswald likely worked as a part time FBI asset, i.e. in trying to expose illegal gun purchases - and this explains why he ordered the 6.5 mm Mannlicher Carcano by mail. This was in relation to a law to exclude from importation or re-importation into the United States arms or ammunition originally manufactured for military purposes in foreign nations.)

As North also  puts it (ibid.)

"This amounts to wholesale destruction of evidence and nothing less than obstruction of justice."

Later, Hoover goes into action to force retractions of statements (i.e. by Police Chief Jesse Curry and others) that Oswald had FBI associations (op. cit, p. 393). In addition to the above, Hoover (according to North, ibid.):

- "attempted to prevent the Warren Commission from learning of the 9/62 contract by the Marcello organization" (New Orleans' Mafia) on JFK's life (op. cit, . p.394)

- "Launched a disinformation campaign to prevent the media from getting a clearer picture of the assassination" (op. cit. p. 395)

This includes suggestions that the paraffin test (which actually suggest his innocence) really implicated him. (ibid.)

- "Supplied a copy of his Report (to the Commission), after much prodding, only on condition that "members of the Commission publicly agree with his conclusions" (op. cit., p. 397)

- Attempts to recruit Johnson in deflecting the Commission's demand for 'raw' FBI files (op. cit., p. 398).

He is unsuccessful, only "managing to delay compliance for almost one month".

-"Attempts to inundate the Commission with irrelevant data" (op. cit. p. 399)

This apparently fails "as evidenced by 52 written interrogatories sent to him on March 26, 1964". (ibid.)

Clearly, from the preceding, Hoover had little interest in getting to the truth and greater interest in using Oswald as a convenient foil. As a pal of LBJ's this also makes total sense, to help cover LBJ's tracks.


As North also notes (in regard to the latter): op. cit., p. 392:

11/22-11/24:

"The aging icon is given control of the case, and immediately sets about  gaining control of the Dallas PD, no small task. In the ensuing chaos, Marcello functionary and Dallas P.D. liaison Jack Ruby murders Oswald. This is an incredible stroke of luck for Hoover, who wastes no time capitalizing on the new situation. Sunday afternoon the Director instructs Dallas SAC Shanklin to sanitize Oswald's file. The official quickly complies. This amounts to wholesale destruction of evidence and nothing less than obstruction of justice."

op. cit. p. 394:

"Hoover's next and near simultaneous objective is to attempt to prevent the public, and the Warren Commission, from learning of the Marcello contract, as well as his, Clyde's and Evans involvement in it. Fortunately for the Director, he has an ally in the Dallas P.D., which is not anxious for the American people to learn that Ruby was Carlos Marcello's liaison to the dept."

"The week of November 25, Hoover makes direct attempts to  prevent Bureau personnel from examining the Marcello organization, with only limited success. Ruby's ties to Civello and McWillie also  become apparent."

op. cit., p. 400:

"From 11/22/63 onward, the symbiotic nature of the Hoover/Johnson relationship becomes evermore apparent. From the beginning, Johnson is deeply indebted to the Director. Having contained the (Billy Sol) Estes scandal and blunted the initial investigation into the (Bobby) Baker/Johnson/ mafia connection, Hoover is now in a position to demand much. LBJ, with his ill-gotten power, is in a position to comply...... from the morning of November 23 onwards, Johnson gives Hoover complete control of the investigation. Justice Dept. access to Bureau files on Baker-Levinson etc, is cut off. The following day, Johnson meets with Texas A.G. Waggoner Carr, undoubtedly  suggesting the official give Hoover his full cooperation. By November 25, Johnson is telling everyone concerned that Hoover is in charge of the investigation."


op. cit., p. 402:

"With the assassination, Robert Kennedy is effectively removed from power. By November 30, his hotline to Hoover is disconnected."


op. cit,.p. 404:

"With the murder of Oswald, and the advent of Hoover's disinformation campaign, the overall quality of reporting suffers. Clearly the press becomes confused, not knowing whom to believe. The European press, viewing the events from a position of greater objectivity, is not fooled. By November 27, they openly accuse Hoover of complicity, and suggest the mafia is behind Ruby. Domestically, disinformation releases regarding Oswald intensify."


What was the actual purpose of the Warren Commission?

In all probability, given the highly incriminating memo of Katzenbach (above) in concert with the Johnson- Hoover hijinks (including Johnson's ordering evidence destroyed, such as JFK's suit coat as well as the limo disassembled,  the dual purpose was: a) to protect LBJ's ass from any suspicion of complicity and b)  to do 'damage control' on the U.S. International image, while scotching rumors that the country's leader was felled by an internal conspiracy. Perhaps this has been forcefully argued nowhere more compellingly that in an article written for The New Republic of June 13, 1964 by Murray Kempton. Some excerpts:


The Warren Commission has come to the moment of decision, and now the only voice we hear from it takes us back to Lord Jeffreys, so exacerbated by the mere sight of a defense, that he cannot endure the formal processes of its trial before shouting it down from the bench. "
            ---------------------------------
The Warren Commission began with the serious handicap of a conception that its duties included a cosmetic job on the American image. Its assignment was not just to find out the truth about a terrible tangle of events but also --- one fears even primarily --- to reassure and unite America and to reassure and quiet down Europe. This aspiration reflected itself in the composition of the commission. It cannot be said that every American trusts every member of the commission; but certainly every member happens to be trusted by someone or other whose good opinion is worth having."
                             ---------------
The commission may have been conceived as nothing more than a transient instrument to promote foreign relations and to insure domestic tranquility But, if it was politics that put them there, it is history which holds these men now, because they are all the servants it has. They sit under the claim of history and of all we owe the memory of John F. Kennedy and, let us not forget, the ghost of Lee Oswald.  If the burden of service to all these things does not demand from these men the conduct we expect from a court of law, then just where is the court of law whose functions are so much more consequential than theirs as to demand --- dignity, a decorum and a detachment that we do not expect
from them?
      ------------------------------------------------------
the Warren Commission has kept the direct physical evidence secret. It is hard to understand why this is necessary
       ----------------------------------------------------

The pattern has been to say what this evidence shows without ever showing the evidence. The commission spokesman tells Anthony Lewis, how many shots were fired and where two of them landed without offering the medical report upon which I certainly hope and would like to believe any
statement from an official source would be based.


-----

In conclusion, let's be aware that by way of his creation of  the Warren Commission on November 29, 1963, LBJ acquired the total power to block any House, Senate or Texas state investigations, while awarding himself the power (via underlings like Hoover, Dulles)  to control all evidence that might possibly surface, and either ignore it, suppress it or allow it to be distorted- thereby further distancing himself, all in the name of “seeking justice”.

The wary reader doesn't have to accept this at first blush, or exposure, but all one can ask is that reader put on his critical thinking cap and go through all of LBJ's documented actions. He in effect, devised the perfect vehicle to cover up the executive action carried out by the national security state and its cronies - and thereby benefited from the state once Kennedy was dead.


Despite Vince Bugliosi’s mythologizing,  or Bill Moyers being “appalled”, Johnson remains the key suspect in at least finalizing the plans for the assassination, probably in collusion with his “Texas Rangers” fund raisers: Mayor Earl Cabell of Dallas (brother of JFK-terminated CIA Deputy Chief Charles Cabell), and H.L. Hunt. The last two, in conjunction with the Dallas Police, were responsible for altering the motorcade route at the last minute, so instead of going directly along Main St. – which would have been the traditional motorcade route in Dallas-  they included a slow and fateful hairpin turn onto Houston Street, then onto Elm Street, directly into the pre-prepared kill zone.

As for Johnson, the ultimate  “smoking bullet” in the sad and sorry inventory of that era is none other than his own fraudulent “commission”.  For if LBJ truly wasn’t involved, then why on earth would he not want to go all out to penetrate every last nook and cranny in a no-holds barred investigation? But as the evidence shows, there were plenty of holds, set up not only by his pal Hoover, but also Dulles with the CIA.  That such a Commission could even come to be, with its veneer of gravitas – designed to cover –up the greatest crime of the 20th century is an unspeakable blight on this nation's honor and values that even a late turn toward truth may not remove.

Bottom line: Anyone, any author, any reporter,  any TV  or media person, who accepts the conclusions of this Commission accepts a fraud, and can therefore himself be deemed a fraud, a dupe or worse, part of the ongoing cover up.





Tuesday, October 22, 2013

The Pre-Assassination Framing of Lee Harvey Oswald (1)


“As Lee Harvey Oswald was being set up as an individual scapegoat, so too was the Soviet Union, together with its less powerful ally, Cuba.” -
James Douglass, JFK and the Unspeakable, p. 277.

As we approach within a month of the 50th anniversary of the JFK assassination it is well to also focus attention on another assassination victim several days later: Lee Harvey Oswald, shot by Jack Ruby in the basement of the Dallas PD.

Millions, including me, watched horrified on the Sunday morning after Kennedy was killed as Oswald was shot down in cold blood. The first ever live televised murder.

Many of us smelled a rat even then, and as one of my math teachers said the next day in class: "Someone just saved the Dallas attorney's office a whole lot of money and the feds a whole lot of prosecution time and headaches."

But it goes beyond that, because the man never had a chance to defend himself against the fell and outrageous claims made against him in a court of law. His family was smeared from pillar to post by the scurrilous claims of a "deranged loner", so much so that Marina Oswald-Porter had to go into hiding with her two girls. Only years later did Marina begin to process - outside of the veil of fear (of deportation)-  how much she'd been manipulated at the time by the Warrenites.  By the time of her 1993 interview with Tom Brokaw she was no longer under any illusions regarding the bogus "lone nut" spell confected by Arlen Specter,  Gerald Ford and others - but had come to see how she had been exploited by an enclave of vermin to protect the actual perps. Brokaw, meanwhile, had been contaminated by lies, distortions and disinfo circulated in Gerald Posner's 'Case Closed' ( recycled more recently with Vince Bugliosi's ironically named  'Reclaiming History'). Those who wish to see the lowdown on Posner's shoddy work can go to this link:

http://www.assassinationweb.com/twpos.htm

But the questions that then arise are: 1) What prompted the lone nut assassin bunkum in the first place? And: 2) How is it that the narrative became so compellingly woven by the time of Oswald's arrest? We now know most of the sordid details and we have to thank deep politics expert and JFK assassination researcher Peter Dale Scott for exposing how Oswald was framed (by the CIA) in the months leading up to the assassination.

Most of this would never have become possible without the rush of documents accessible in the wake of passage of the JFK Records Act (spurred in large part by Oliver Stone's movie, 'JFK') . The release of so many critical files (now nearly slowed to a crawl since Bush  Jr. and Obama were elected) made it possible to ascertain the existence of  CIA (and other) secret files on Oswald and which were exposed in books like John Newman's 'Oswald and the CIA' and Peter Dale Scott's 'Deep Politics and the Death of JFK'.  In a 1995 essay in Deep Politics Quarterly, Scott also noted the stake Americans have "not just to learn about the government's secretiveness with respect to this one assassination" but to "create a precedent against the rule of secrecy that has so vitiated democracy in this country" since the end of WWII.

While there was an open window for critical and massive file access,  just after passage of the JFK Records Act (and following an Executive order) in Clinton's 2nd term, it slowed to a crawl once Bush Jr. was shoehorned into power then even more after 9/11 and the "war on terror". It was felt that rather than government transparency, secrecy was the order of the day and the less citizens knew about their gov't (and conversely the MORE the gov't knew about them) the better. Thus the spread of the NSA national security state, to the  insidious, monolithic beast Edward Snowden has revealed.

Despite the closure of the file release windows (the National Archives refuses to release many critical ones in this 50th marker year) Peter Dale Scott did unearth enough to expose how Lee Oswald was framed as the "lone assassin". In 1995,  Scott also advised us - based on these files- that 3 different stratagems needed to be distinguished by the researcher: 1) a sophisticated intelligence operation (or complex of operations), i.e. to frame Lee Oswald, 2) the conspiracy to kill the President and 3) the ensuing cover-up.

The problem is that all too often a lazy (or compromised) corporate media has never properly separated these stratagems. Indeed, in many cases they've ignored both (1) and (3) - the latter hardly surprising given "Operation Mockingbird"- and made fun of "tin foil hats" in (2).  Indeed, as Scott has observed, in the 30th anniversary year of 1993 - in the wake of "Posnermania" -  the corporate media simply trotted out the same recycled canards including that of a

"neurotic frustrated by neglect, and 'angered' (Posner's words) that 'others failed to recognize the stature he thought he deserved."

This codswallop was then additionally integrated into the CIA- confected narrative that Oswald was a "KGB -linked assassin"  hired to kill Kennedy. It was based on a supposed "Oswald" phone call to the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City with a KGB agent, Valeriy Kostikov. From this, and the visit of a fake Oswald to the Embassy (see the asset "masquerading" as Oswald in Mexico City in the photo above - right) a series of falsified cables was generated under the fake name "Lee Henry Oswald"* . These became part of a CI/SIG (Counter Intelligence Special Investigation Group) file on Oswald dating back to 1960, and as Scott notes, has their handiwork all over the false trail.  The purpose, as noted by Peter Dale Scott, was clear:

"to incriminate him falsely as an apparent KGB assassin"

While the "Oswald as KGB assassin"  ruse was never used  or published in its Report by the Warren Commission, "it almost certainly contributed to the Warren Commission's determination to close the case as the work of a lone assassin" (Scott, Deep Politics, 113)   This is actually validated and was foreseen when one examined a key paragraph in the Katzenbach memo which readers can see in full here: http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId=756877

Note in particular paragraph (2):

"Speculation about Oswald's motivation ought to be cut off, and we should have some basis of rebutting thought that this was a Communist conspiracy".

When this is interpreted in the context of the rest of the memo, and especially Part (1) pertaining to convicting Oswald, it is clear the Commission was driven to the lone assassin bunkum as the only alternative to the KGB assassin hypothesis.

The surge to do this was reinforced after the Commission was informed  by CIA head Richard Helms** of the Kostikov -Department Thirteen connection ("Department Thirteen" was that KGB Section assigned to assassinations) . Earl Warren evidently became so spooked that he felt the only alternative to a possible nuclear  confrontation  was to find for the lone assassin theory. From then, all evidence, documents and tests became devoted to nailing Oswald as the lone perp. It was either that or find him a KGB- hired contract killer, which many (including LBJ) felt would have led to war.

The point was that the CIA had compiled such a compelling false narrative and guilt trail using phony cables, photos  phone calls etc. that the Commission bit into it hook, line and sinker and never remotely considered (or seriously considered) the alternative: that a right wing based- military- intelligence operation had targeted Kennedy. One that included powerful forces enraged at his backing down (from invasion) during the Cuban Missile Crisis, his removal of Gen. Edwin Walker from command, his intent to pull out of Vietnam and his efforts at rapprochement with Fidel Castro. More to come.
-------------------------------
Footnotes:

* Scott conjectures that the false name of  'Lee Henry Oswald'  may have been used to deceive investigators into Kennedy's killing. It may also have been what agent James Jesus Angleton called a 'marked card' operation in which falsified information 'like a  bent card' is passed through an intelligence channel to see where it ends up.

**  Memo of 1/13/ 64 from Richard Helms to the Warren Commission Counsel J. Lee Rankin, CIA Document 509-803.


Sunday, October 20, 2013

“Beware Conspiracy Theorists?” No – Beware Those Who Are Part of the Unspeakable!

Media personality Michael Smerconish in his Op-ed in today’s Denver Post, advises one and all (based on his header) to ”Beware Conspiracy Theorists”. We are supposed to be the bane of national existence, sowing paranoia with our every blog post, and hey – we are little different from the generic nuts who fret over UN helicopters and FEMA concentration camps. In this way, lumped in with whackjobs, all manner of conspiracies are instantly consigned to the dumpster of history.

But based on accumulated documents, I choose to believe something different: That REAL conspiracies DO exist and have occurred, and hiding them doesn’t help the citizens or the nation. Author Michael Parenti (The Dirty Truth) makes no bones about the fact that “most people suffer from conspiracy phobia” and “they treat anyone who investigates conspiracy as a conspiracy buff or oddball”. He also has a problem with the term “conspiracy theory” since it permits the critics and skeptics to have their intellectual cake and eat it. If the claimed conspiracy hasn’t been validated to their satisfaction, it’s merely a theory (which they erroneously equate with speculation), but if it was validated, as in Watergate, then ‘Voila!’ it’s no longer theory but an actuality! But this is essential nonsense. As Parenti observes, it means that “conspiracy can never be proven and if proven it can’t be conspiracy”.

But we know that real, bona fide conspiracies have indeed occurred and been validated. In the Watergate conspiracy, Nixon and his cronies virtually handed the evidence to investigating committees and prosecutors on a 'silver platter' since they’d taped everything! Every word and every plan or scheme was recorded, from targeting McGovern supporters using the IRS, to illegal wiretaps of those on the “enemies' list” to breaking and entering into Daniel Ellsberg’s place In the BCCI conspiracy, the machinations of a criminal bank were almost kept hidden as tens of thousands lost their money around the world and the bank funded terrorist activities. In the Iran –Contra conspiracy, Reaganites sold Israeli Hawk and TOW missiles to Iran and funneled the money from sales into Nicaragua to support the Rightist “Contras’. In the 'Operation Northwoods' conspiracy, the plot was exposed before a clique of U.S. generals could unleash terror attacks on Americans and blame Castro, to start a war in 1962.

So why not also a conspiracy to murder a popular President? Especially when that President altered his stance from being a cold-warrior to a leader committed to peace – to the extent of banning nuclear weapons tests and disciplining run amuck generals who wanted to launch a nuclear war. But as author James Douglass has noted ( JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters), too many in the media and in government have sought to protect those who killed Kennedy and prevent the truth from disclosure. .

In Douglass’ words:.

“Our collective denial of the obvious, in the setting up of Oswald and his transparent silencing by Ruby, made possible the Dallas cover-up. The success of the cover-up was the indispensable foundation for the murders of Malcolm X, Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy by the same forces at work in our government – and ourselves:

Hope for change in the world was targeted and killed four times over. The cover-up of all four murders, each leading into the next, was based – first of all –on denial. Not the government’s but our own- and the unspeakable was not far away.” .


Nevertheless, it appears those like Michael Smerconish are quite happy to go on killing hope for change in the world multiple times over, as they seek to dissuade the citizen from examining the facts of the conspiracy behind the Kennedy assassination. Smerconish begins his sarcastic attack by singling out Jesse Ventura’s book: They Killed Our President: 63 Reasons to Believe There Was A Conspiracy to Assassinate JFK. So Smerconish gets Ventura in an interview and asks the question: “Who is ‘they’?” Ventura, honest as he is, responds that he doesn’t know. The ‘they’ employed was generic, and could apply to any of the conceivable forces – or all – that had it in for Kennedy, but especially his national security state. Besides, Ventura could have told Smerconish if he really knew who ‘they’ were he likely wouldn’t be alive to say so! As per Richard Charnin’s excellent graphical proof of conspiracy based on the death of witnesses at the times of the two main investigations, see. e.g.

http://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2013/10/14/jfk-witness-deaths-graphical-proof-of-a-conspiracy/

So really, Smerky, if ANYONE did know who ‘they’ were, they are long since dead and buried. Smerconish then goes on to cite the infamous Katzenbach memo – which read in its intro and first section:

”"It is important that all facts surrounding President Kennedy's assassination be made public in a way which will satisfy people in the United States and abroad that all the facts have been told and that a statement to this effect be made now.

1. The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin, that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial.


He spuriously claims that (1) alone “sounds ominous” but when the whole is taken in context, not so much! Katzenbach was merely “anticipating that 50 years later guys like Ventura would seek to prosper by spinning yarns”, but fails to observe that Katzenbach himself never seriously believed anyone would challenge the words, or Warren Report in a serious way since LBJ had sealed all the records at least until 2037 when most of those who care would likely have died. It was only the passage of the 'JFK Records Act' in 1992 that averted this national travesty!

So, to Smerconish's arguments, I reply: Codswallop! To the critical thinker, the above enumerated first point of the memo provides enough evidence to disclose the true purpose of any ''official' investigation: to arrive at a preconceived and pre-accepted conclusion, that was politically and socially expedient. This was as opposed to the outcome of an open-ended, genuine investigation. This also goes under the rubric of a fundamental logical no-no called: 'Affirming the consequent' - i.e. affirming ab initio that which you need to prove. Taking the shortcut - avoiding the process, more: ensuring the outcome of the process blends with one's own 'truth'. A much more acceptable version for public consumption or to put it in blunt terms: expeditious political PR.

Smerconish ends his whiff effort at smacking “conspiracy theorists” in the JFK case by appealing to Arlen Specter, who he avers was “so passionate for the truth about the Warren Commission that he intended to maintain an active speaking schedule during the 50th anniversary year – to defend his conclusions from years ago.” We shall miss the voice of the “passionate” Mr. Specter, but it’s perhaps better he isn’t adding to all the existing noise and deception ….or the unspeakable…especially with that insane “magic bullet” fairy tale he fabricated. As I showed in my previous post (on Joe Klein's BS), it was Specter's own yarn that propelled the Warrenites to lie, debase and distort the evidence to find for one lone gunman – including to do with the autopsy – and I cited examples in that last post and in the one taking Larry Sabato to task.

I have not read Ventura’s book, I admit. He may be closer to the truth or not. But I again recommend to all serious readers, who really want to know why Kennedy was killed, to get hold of James Douglass’ book and make it your best friend for the next month. In that way, you will assure you won’t be part of the unspeakable.

Friday, October 28, 2011

Stephen King's New SciFi Tale: Fun, But Not Historically Accurate!




Science fiction tales dealing with time travel are among my favorites. Perhaps the most authentic ever written, but not given enough attention, is L. Sprague de Camp's 'Lest Darkness Fall', (1939), about a 20th century professor - Martin Padway - who finds himself suddenly hurled back to the Roman Empire in the sixth century by encountering a "time slip" in Rome. (Time slips are theorized to be interphased time warps in our own space-time wherein a person who happens into them can be transported to the past.) Physicist Michael Shallis in his book, On Time, explores a few such incidents.

More recently other time travel stories have revolved about going back to the Kennedy assassination in an attempt to alter the outcome. The most recent TV version of actual physical intervention in the past, based on the new Twilight Zone series (which ran from 1985-88) was entitled "Profiles in Silver" about a 23rd century history professor (and descendant of John F. Kennedy) who attempts to go back to Nov. 22, 1963 and stop Lee Harvey Oswald from firing from the Texas School Book depository 6th floor. In another case, the early 1990s 'Quantum Jump' featured a similar attempt to stop Oswald - with Scott Bakula's character's consciousness projected into Oswald, since time travel via quantum jump didn't allow actual physical transfer to the past.

Now, in novel form, horror author Stephen King deals with a similar scenario in his '11/22/63' just out. In this case, we follow his character, school teacher Jack Epping, as he attempts to travel back in time to stop the nasty, "snarling" (in one perp walk photo) Lee Harvey Oswald from carrying out his foul deed.

The problem with all these scenarios is they are predicated on a false historical presumption that Lee Harvey Oswald was the perpetrator and sole assassin. (Thanks to the Warren Commission, which was really a creature of Lyndon Johnson, as opposed to an official government investigation such as the 1978-79 House Subcommittee on Assassinations which found a "96% probability of conspiracy") This is abject nonsense, and mainly was perpetrated on an unsuspecting (but shocked) American public in the fall of 1963, in order to placate the lords of power and cop to political expediency rather than truth telling.

The poisoned and deceitful core of the Warren Whitewash inhered in the (Nov. 25, 1963) memo from then Deputy Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach that preceded it. The key memo segments that bear on the way the Warren Commissioners were to conduct their business are as follows:

"It is important that all facts surrounding President Kennedy's assassination be made public in a way which will satisfy people in the United States and abroad that all the facts have been told and that a statement to this effect be made now.

1. The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin, that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial."

The last is especially fell and egregious, an insult to the whole concept of justice and being innocent until proven guilty. Indeed, Katzenbach's injunction goes under the rubric of a fundamental logical no-no called: 'Affirming the consequent' - i.e. affirming ab initio that which you need to prove. Taking the expedient shortcut - avoiding the process, more: ensuring the outcome of the process blends with one's own agenda!

The proof was in the pudding, as documented by former federal special agent Walt Brown, in the proportion of serious questions attended to or asked by the Commission (Treachery in Dallas, p. 281):

Preliminaries - 805 (2.1%)
To the point - 1,537 (4.1%)
Not vital - 16,073 (43.3%)
Clarification - 7,354 (19.8%)
Leading/hearsay 9,676 (26.0%)
Conclusionary - 922 (2.4%)
Foregone conclusion 323 (0.80%)
Nonsense - 407 (1.09%)

Most appalling is that the 'to the point' (questions materially contributing to the investigation) category comprised an insignificant 4.1 % of the total for which the Commissioners were present. For the percentage of all the questions asked - with or without the Commissioners present, that went up a mighty three tenths of a point, to 4.4% (op.cit., p281). Even more appalling is that 52.05% of the total Commission questions were directed at people with no direct knowledge of the crime!

At the same time, 200 material witnesses- "each with knowledge at least as valuable as that given by the 488 commission witnesses" were not asked questions. These included :


- Tom Alyea (who allegedly first filmed the sniper's 'nest')

- Charles A. Crenshaw (Parkland surgical resident at the time – who observed the gaping rear head wound)

- Julia Ann Mercer - spotted a truck on the triple underpass with a rifle inside

- William Harper - found the occipital bone fragment 25’ behind the limo

- Guy Banister - ran the Camp St. office in New Orleans from which Oswald distributed leaflets;

- Joseph Milteer -the right wing zealot who predicted the assassination by sniper

- Sergio Archacha Smith -believed to be the person who fired at Gen. Edwin Walker

- Mary Moorman -took the Moorman photo at the instant of the head shot

- Aquilla Clemons - observed the Tippitt shooting, and saw another man – not Oswald, doing it

- Silvia Duran - consul employee who could have testified to the identity of the ‘Oswald' seen in Mexico City;

Gordon Arnold : stood on the grass in front of the knoll's picket fence when a shot tore past hie ear, and made him hit the dirt – he was subsequently sent to duty in Alaska)

All of these in concert disclose the Warren Commission was not a fact-finding body, but a deliberately designed Whitewash body, enjoined to find the expedient solution to the crime of the century. That King hasn't investigated all these aspects and issues before setting out on his novel - which essentially endorses the PR-framed "official version" - doesn't say much for his boldness, historical acumen or investigatory skills.

In the three images attached to this blog - under King's visage - are the three primary indicators that Oswald had nothing to do with killing JFK on November 22, 1963.

First, to the left, we see a critical Zapruder photo (second after frame Z-313), which clearly shows Jackie lurching over the limo trunk. What was she doing? Why did she lurch in that particular direction? Her own special testimony delivered in secret and not formally printed with the main volumes of the Warren Commission Hearings (but in their Appendices), is telling: she was trying to retrieve a dislodged piece or fragment of JFK's skull. (Note: This is also affirmed by her in recently released audio tapes she made, dated from 1964, in interviews with historian Arthur J. Schlesinger, Jr.).

But here's the problem: If this is indeed so (and a number of other films, photos, e.g. the Nix film shown in the Italian documentary The Two Kennedys, appear to bear it out), then it could not have been Lee Oswald firing from the Texas Book Depository to the REAR of the limo! The reason is linked to basic physics, specifically Newtonian mechanics and the transfer of linear momentum. Hence, if a piece of skull fragment is displaced over the rear of the limo, it could not have been from a bullet fired to the rear of the limo, but rather from the front. But the front is not where Oswald is claimed to have been by the Warrenites! In other words, the account of the Warren Commission is exactly 180 degrees opposite to the principles of basic physics.

Let's even leave out for now, the fact that a trained team of expert marksmen was unable to replicate Oswald's alleged feat! Oswald was presumed to have fired from the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository, so effectively six stories up or 60’ in altitude. However, the experts were allowed to fire from a tower only half this altitude (30’)[1]. In addition, while Oswald had to have fired at a limousine moving at 11 mile per hour, the experts fired at stationary targets. Anyone who's ever fired a high powered rifle will tell you it's much easier to hit a stationary target than a moving one!

[1] The Warren Commission Report, p. 137.

The target area was also magnified for the experts, to the whole upper torso of the target prop’s body – while Oswald was limited to the head and neck. More to the point, the rifle was altered away from the one Oswald used. The rifle sight itself was rebuilt and “metal shims were fitted to provide a degree of accuracy previously absent’. When Ronald Simmons, the Chief of the Infantry Weapons Evaluation Branch of the Army’s Ballistics Research Division was asked about this he replied: “Well, they could not sight the weapon in using the telescope" (Op. cit. ,Vol. II, p. 250.)

He added that the aiming apparatus had to be rebuilt by a machinist with two shims added, one to adjust for the elevation, the other for the azimuth. In other words, had they actually used the rifle in the same condition Oswald was alleged to have had it, then they’d likely not have hit the side of a barn. (Maybe one reason the Italians dubbed their Norma Mannlicher-Carcano 6.5 mm bolt action rifle that Oswald was supposed to have used as "the rifle that never killed anyone")


At the end of the test trials, these Master Marksmen each fired two series of three shots each (18 rounds in all) at 3 stationary targets placed at distances of 175’, 240’ and 265’ (the last coming nearest to the distance from the Texas School Book Depository to the head shot). Even Chief Simmons admitted that the targets were not placed where they ought to have been to emulate conditions on November 22, 1963.

Just one of the three expert riflemen was able to get off three shots in under 5.6 seconds – the designated time interval for total shots declared by the Warren Commission. And most to the point: none of the total 18 shots fired struck the targets in the head or the neck. In other words, from a technical standpoint of duplicating Oswald’s alleged shots- this trio of experts failed. Another key aspect: for the duration of the 18 rounds, two of the “master” riflemen were unable to reload and fire at the stationary target as rapidly as Oswald purportedly did for the moving limo.

Again, the facts don't add up, and that non-addition gets compounded when one factors in another little detail the Warren Whitewashers never bothered to disclose: that the purported assassin window on the 6th floor of the TSBD (see image at far right - below King's image)was nearly totally blocked by the branches of an oak tree at the time. Only a fool or half idiot would have attempted such a shot. The preferred shot then would have been out from the window facing and overlooking Houston St. as the limo was approaching the steep turn around the TSBD, not going out onto Elm St.!

Finally, we have the LIFE cover photo of Oswald, from its Feb 21, 1964 issue, which was essentially to be the coup de grace for the framing of the man. Little did anyone bother to say or analyze that the shadows disclosed in this and other photos purportedly taken from Oswald's Neeley St. address in Dallas didn't match the astronomical aspects for the alleged date taken.

As it turns out, on March 31, 1963 (the documented date from FBI files for the backyard photo), one can compute (using a specialized computer program[2]) the maximum solar altitude on the local meridian at noon (for lat. 32 deg 47’ 09” or Dallas, TX) as 57.0 deg. For example, in the LIFE photo, let x2 be the near edge of the 3rd fence picket and x1 be the position of the heel of Lee’s boot, and (x2 – x1) = 1.5 m. Let (y2 – y1) be the distance of Lee in front of the picket fence, or 3m. (See also: http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2009/11/hany-farids-pixelated-illusions.html)

Then the distance d1(x,y) ought to approximately yield the length of his shadow, in this case:

d1(x,y) = {3m)^2 + (1.5^m )2}^1/2 = 3.35 m.

A first cross-check can be applied via using the computed value 3.35m, in conjunction with a known physical construct that can yield independent information. Now, Lee’s height is know to have been 5’ 9” or 1.74m. We also know from basic astronomy that the height of an object in the Sun is related to its minimum shadow length (L_s = d1(x,y)) by:

tan (a) = H/ L_s

where (a) is the altitude of the Sun.

Thus:

tan (a) = (1.74)/ (3.35) = 0.464, or a = 24.8 deg

However, what if d1(x,y) is off by 50%? And therefore, d1(x,y) = 1.17 m instead of 3.35m? Then, the altitude of the Sun would be:

tan (a) = (1.74)/ (1.17) = 56.0 deg

Or, within 1 degree of the maximum solar altitude on the local meridian at noon or Dallas, TX as on that date! This means that if the photo is legit, and conforms to the correct solar meridian crossing on that date, Oswald’s shadow can be no longer than 1.12m, which sets limits on how far he can be located from the picket fence. But estimated measurements shows a disparity, significant - so the LIFE photo cannot be legit, but obviously confected to frame him.


According to a gushing Wall Street Journal review (natch, as the WSJ always detested Kennedy's "statist" proposals) of King's effort ('Stephen King's New Monster', p. D1, today) King:



"studied various conspiracy theories. He ultimately dismissed them, drawing the unsettling conclusion that a single person with no political power or charisma managed to alter the course of history by himself"

All well and good, except that neither the ballistics, as evidenced in assorted reactions captured on film (such as that shown with Jackie above), the post-event efforts at expert replication of the shots, or even the astronomical aspects for shadow configurations (in the purported LIFE Oswald photo) support King's dismissal. Does this mean King was lazy? Not necessarily! But as any fiction writer knows, the writiing (and reading!)of any novel is enhanced by simplicity of plot not additional concatenations (even if lending to a greater historical accuracy) that may try the readers' patience, especially in today's tweeter-ipad, sound bite age. Thus, one may regard King's dismissal of conspiracy for his novel as more in concert with justified artistic license than deliberately ignoring the fact that Oswald as assassin doesn't add up. Or to put it more bluntly, King opted for go for an expediently written novel, as opposed to one that reflected history more faithfully (such as Don deLillo's excellent, 'Libra'.)



Leaving out a non-historian fiction novelist's ruminations and choices, I will refer readers to Prof.. David R. Wrone's take, in The Journal of Southern History(6), February, 1995, p. 188:


"I believe that irrefutable evidence shows conspirators, none of them Oswald, killed JFK. A mentally ill Jack Ruby, alone and unaided, shot Oswald. The federal inquiry knowingly collapsed and theorized a political solution. Its corruption spawned theorists who tout solutions rather than define the facts that are locked in the massively muddied evidentiary base, and released only by hard work.”


So, read and enjoy King's latest novel, but do so while retaining a little cautionary reservation in the back of your mind. The real guys that King's protagonist Jack Epping needed to get were obviously so clever that they got Epping (and King by extension) to go after the wrong man!

[1] This is the “Astronomy Lab” software program which enables one to fix a location by latitude and longitude, then obtain the maximum solar altitude at those coordinates for the date.