COPA CALENDAR OF UPCOMING EVENTS, 2009

February 21, 2009 - One Response

“44/44: KILLING THE MESSENGER”

A Forum on the Assassination of Malcolm X
Commemorating the 44th Anniversary/ 44th President
At the Shabazz Center, the site of the historic
Audubon Ballroom

Saturday, February 21, 2009 – 6:00 pm
3940 Broadway, New York City

Co-sponsored by:
The Malcolm X & Dr. Betty Shabazz Memorial and Educational Center
www.theshabazzcenter.net
The Coalition on Political Assassinations
www.politicalassassinations.com

Speakers:
Dr. William Pepper, Esq., author of Orders to Kill, Act of State
John Judge, director, Coalition on Political Assassinations
Steve Clark, editor of The Assassination of Malcolm X
Wynne Alexander, WDAS Radio historian and journalist
Professor James Small, OAAU, trustee of Shabazz Center
Iman Talib ‘Abdur-Rashid, trustee of Shabazz Center

Moderator: Dowoti Dezir, Executive Director, Shabazz Center

Open to the public, no admission
Check our website for a possible live webcast: www.politicalassassinations.com

WBAI Pacifica FM in NYC will be recording this event and will
be offering audio copies as part of their fundraising
drive.

For information and other events: 212-588-1341 or www.theshabazzcenter.net

SPEAKER BIOS:

Dr. William Pepper, Esq. – A Barrister in England and an attorney, admitted in a number of jurisdictions in the US, whose work has focused on International Human Rights. Dr. William Pepper was a close friend and colleague of Martin Luther King, Jr. during the last year of his life, following Dr. King’s reading of his article on the Viet Nam war when he was a young journalist who exposed the war crimes against the civilian population. At Dr. King’s request, he directed the National Conference For New Politics, an umbrella peace and freedom organization formed to oppose the war and continue the struggle to empower the poor. He became James Earl Ray’s attorney in 1988, after becoming convinced that he was an unknowing patsy. He represented James Earl Ray until he died, and then represented the King family at an historic trial in 1999, where a jury in Memphis found that a government conspiracy existed to kill Dr. King, and cleared Ray. Pepper investigated the King assassination for some 30 years, and is the author of Orders to Kill, Act of State, with a final work in preparation. He has been a visiting scholar and Fellow at Cambridge and Oxford Universities and convened the Seminar in International Human Rights for two years at Oxford University, and he was Robert F. Kennedy’s Citizen Chairman in Westchester County, when he ran for the Senate in the year before Malcolm was assassinated. He is now is lead Counsel for Sirhan Sirhan, who he has come to believe was yet another patsy in that assassination.

Steve Clark – Editor of George Breitman’s The Assassination of Malcolm X and senior editor at Pathfinder Press of other books on Malcolm X’s speeches and legacy, Steve Clark also edits The New Internationalist magazine.
Professor James Small – Currently director of the Organization of African American Unity, founded by Malcolm X, and a trustee of the Shabazz Center, James Small moved to New York City where he joined the organization of Afro-American Unity founded by the legendary Malcolm X. In 1967, Prof. Small became Imam (minister) of the Muslim Mosque Incorporated, also founded by Malcolm X. Between the years of 1966 and 1980, he was a member of the N.A.A.C.P., the O.A.A. U., and S.N.C.C. He served as President of the Association for the Study of Classical African Civilization’s Eastern Region for two years, where he worked and studied with Dr. John Henrik Clarke, Dr. Yosef A. A. Ben Jochannan, Dr. Leonard Jeffries, Dr. Ivan Van Sertima, Dr. Asa Hilliard, Dr. Wade Nobles, Dr. Amos Wilson and Dr. Cress Welling. He taught for nearly twenty years at the City University of New York, including 17 years at the City College of New York’s Black Studies Department, and for two years at New York City Technical College
Iman Talib ‘Abdur-Rashid – A trustee of Shabazz Center, Rashid is the religious and spiritual leader of The Mosque of Islamic Brotherhood in Harlem, New York City. He is also the Amir (leader) of the Harlem Shura (a coalition of seven Harlem mosques). Having served for a decade as the chairman of the Justice Committee of the Majlis Ash-Shura (Islamic Leadership Council) of New York, he has just been appointed a Vice President, and serves nationally as the Deputy Amir of The Muslim Alliance in North America. Further, Imam Talib (as he is popularly known) serves on or advises several interfaith bodies located in New York City.

Wynne Alexander – Author and investigative journalist, Wynne Alexander wrote the first and only music- infused civil rights curriculum in the country, Get it from the Drums, featuring the work of 17 musical superstars. She has also produced radio and TV documentaries and the highly informative website WDASHistory.org chronicling the groundbreaking civil rights work of that radio station and its work with Malcolm X, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Congressman Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. and many other national leaders. In 1964, Malcolm X got a serious death threat during a visit to WDAS.

John Judge – Independent researcher, author and lecturer, John Judge has been the executive director of the national Coalition on Political Assassinations since 1994, which holds regional and national conferences on the major political assassinations presenting the best evidence of medical, forensic and ballistics experts, academics and authors and researchers, and works to secure full release of all classified government files and records related to these murders. Their work led to the passage and implementation of the JFK Assassination Records Act and the release of over 6.5 million pages of previously hidden government files. Judge is currently working on the passage of a Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Records Act as well.

Dowoti Désir – Executive Director of The Malcolm X & Dr. Betty Shabazz Memorial and Educational Center a not-for-profit focused on human, civil, and educational rights. Dowoti Desir, the former Associate Publisher of The AFRIcan Magazine has served as an Adjunct Professor in the Africana Studies Department of Brooklyn College, City University of New York. She has worked for over 20 years in the arts community in the U.S. As the Director of Community Arts Initiatives of the Lower Manhattan Cultural Council [LMCC], Ms. Désir managed the largest grant program administered by the State of New York, the Fund for Creative Communities. At LMCC she also conceived and managed the innovative cultural assessment project, Mapping New Terrain: Communities in Transition, which analyzed the impact of globalization in the Harlem’s various communities.

Wednesday, June 10, 2009, 12:00 pm
“And We Are All Mortal…”
Commemorative event on the 46th anniversary of JFK’s speech against the Cold War
Memorial Plaque, campus of American University (southeast end of football field)
4800 Nebraska Ave. NW, Washington, DC (entance at New Mexico and Nebraska Aves.)
Readings followed by luncheon meeting.
Open to public, no cost.

Friday to Sunday, November 20-22, 2009
Open Secrets: the Assassinations of the 1960s
Annual Regional Meeting of COPA
Hotel Lawrence, Dallas, TX
302 S. Jackson St. (off Dealey Plaza)
Speakers, films, books, resources, email for details
Moment of Silence, Grassy Knoll, 12:30 pm November 22.
Open to public, registration fees paid on site.

Check out our new website:
www.politicalassassinations.com

National organization of medical and ballistic experts, academics and authors, researchers and interested individuals investigating major political assassinations in America and abroad. Responsible for creation and implementation of the JFK Assassination Records Act. Promoting a Martin Luther King Records Act and a grand jury process to reopen all the major assassinations.

COPA in 2nd AP story

November 30, 2008 - Leave a Response

JFK anniversary marked at Dallas shooting site
By ANDRE COE
Associated Press Writer
Kansas City Star
11/23/08

Bill Newman points to the spot he and his wife Gayle, left, were located when President John F. Kennedy was shot Nov. 22, 1963, as they tour The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza in Dallas, Tuesday, June 3, 2008.
Ed Reinke (photo)

Bill Newman points to the spot he and his wife Gayle, left, were located when President John F. Kennedy was shot Nov. 22, 1963, as they tour The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza in Dallas, Tuesday, June 3, 2008.

About 500 people crowded Saturday into the plaza where John F. Kennedy was shot 45 years ago, all agreeing it was right to remember a pivotal moment in American history, even if they didn’t all believe the official line.

People stood shoulder to shoulder and bowed their heads during a moment of silence at 12:30 p.m. Some hawked JFK memorabilia or pitched conspiracy theories to visitors. Others offered firsthand accounts of their memories of the killing.

Visiting from Pipersville, Penn., 66-year-old Barbara Koenig said coming to the site was something she needed to do.

“I remember the day of the assassination, and I’ve always wanted to visit this site,” she said. “It’s just an eerie feeling. It kind of takes you back 45 years to what you were doing and thinking about the whole tragedy of the affair. I burst into tears (then). In fact, I’m ready to cry now.”

Nearby, street vendors held out commemorative newspapers hoping would-be customers would buy them. One person roamed the crowd with a sign questioning whether it was a lone gunman who killed Kennedy or several.

A group of men who wore black suits, matching ties and earpieces stood silent and appeared to guard a large black banner behind them.

The day Kennedy was assassinated is one people should always remember, but its truth still has not been entirely revealed, argued John Judge, head of the Coalition On Political Assassinations, a Washington-based organization that researches political assassinations.

Judge believes Kennedy’s assassination was a government conspiracy and could easily be solved if all of the facts were revealed.

“If the case were to be honestly investigated or if a grand jury could open it up, we could get at it,” he said. “I think (people) want to remember a piece of their history that was stolen from them.”

On Saturday, two Xs spray-painted in the street marked the spots where Kennedy was hit as his motorcade drove through the plaza. A placard from the National Park Service stood on the ground directly across from one X.

For 68-year-old Ann Murphy, news of Kennedy’s assassination stunned her when it reached her and other teachers in Toronto. She was in disbelief when school officials announced, “President Kennedy has been shot in Dallas,” she said.

Murphy stayed glued to her father’s grainy, black-and-white television set for more news on the events unfolding in the United States. She was even more stunned when she saw nightclub owner Jack Ruby later shoot the suspect in Kennedy’s assassination, Lee Harvey Oswald, on live television, Murphy said.

“It’s strange,” she said, “that one man’s influence and popularity would extend well outside his own country.”

JFK and Vietnam, LA Times story.

November 30, 2008 - Leave a Response

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-goldstein22-2008nov22,0,403772.story

Los Angeles Times
JFK and Vietnam
Kennedy’s assassination 45 years ago today made it an American war.
By Gordon M. Goldstein
November 22, 2008

The assassination of John F. Kennedy 45 years ago today brought an abrupt end to what his admirers called Camelot, a presidential era of glamour, intelligence, wit and possibility. But the murder had an even more profound consequence: Nov. 22, 1963, was the single most significant day in the history of the Vietnam War.

It’s not possible to know for certain how Kennedy would have managed the crisis in Vietnam had he lived. But it’s clear that he was determined to prevent Vietnam from becoming an American war and that he expected to withdraw fully during a second term.

At the point Kennedy assumed office in 1961, American military involvement in Southeast Asia was limited to arms shipments and a small number of advisors. But the South Vietnamese regime of Ngo Dinh Diem was facing an increasingly potent communist insurgency and, in the U.S., pressure was building to send in ground troops.

Over the course of the year, Kennedy’s advisors presented him with half a dozen or more proposals to Americanize the war. In one, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, Secretary of State Dean Rusk and the Joint Chiefs of Staff argued that it would be difficult to prevent “the fall of South Vietnam by any measures short of the introduction of U.S. forces on a substantial scale.”

Kennedy’s advisors told him that to defend the Saigon regime might take more than 200,000 combat troops. McGeorge Bundy, national security advisor, believed that committing American troops was vital. “Laos was never really ours after 1954,” Bundy explained to the skeptical president, invoking another Southeast Asian nation where Kennedy had resisted intervention. “Vietnam is and wants to be.”

Kennedy was not receptive. Long before becoming president, he had spoken out in Congress against the disastrous French experience in Vietnam, citing it as a reason the U.S. should never fight a ground war there. In the summer of 1961, he said he had accepted the conclusion of Gen. Douglas MacArthur, who counseled against a land war in Asia, insisting that even a million American infantry soldiers would not be sufficient to prevail. He would offer military aid and training to Saigon, but he would not authorize the dispatch of ground forces.

Over the three years of his presidency, Kennedy sometimes invoked hawkish rhetoric about Vietnam. He also increased the military advisors and training personnel there to roughly 16,000. But McNamara and Bundy both came to believe that Kennedy would not have Americanized the war — even if the price was communism in South Vietnam.

COPA in AP story

November 30, 2008 - Leave a Response

COPA was mentioned recently in an Associated Press story about commemorations of the 45th anniversary of the assassination of President Kennedy.

Hundreds gather at Dealey Plaza to commemorate JFK
By ANDRE COE Associated Press Writer © 2008 The Associated Press
Nov. 22, 2008, 7:59PM
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/6127445.html

DALLAS — On the day marking the 45th anniversary of John F. Kennedy’s assassination, some 500 people crowded into Dallas’ Dealey Plaza to remember one of the most tragic moments in American history.

People stood shoulder-to-shoulder and bowed their heads during a moment of silence at 12:30 p.m. Saturday. Some hawked JFK memorabilia or pitched conspiracy theories to visitors with cameras and video recorders in hand who moved about. Others offered firsthand accounts of their moment in the tragic event.

Visiting from Pipersville, Penn., 66-year-old Barbara Koenig said coming to the site was something she needed to do.

“I remember the day of the assassination and I’ve always wanted to visit this site,” she said. “It’s just an eerie feeling. It kind of takes you back 45 years to what you were doing and thinking about the whole tragedy of the affair. I burst into tears (then). In fact, I’m ready to cry now.”

Nearby, street vendors held out commemorative newspapers hoping would-be customers would buy them.

One person roamed the crowd with a sign that questioned whether it was a lone gunman who killed Kennedy or several.

A group of men who wore black suits, matching ties and earpieces stood silent and seemed to guard a large black banner that stood behind them.

The day Kennedy was assassinated is one people should always remember, but its truth still has not been entirely revealed, said John Judge, head of the Coalition On Political Assassinations (COPA), a Washington-based organization dedicated to researching political assassinations.

Kennedy was shot in the head while riding through Dealey Plaza on Nov. 22, 1963.

Judge believes Kennedy’s assassination was a government conspiracy and could be easily solved if all of the facts were revealed.

“If the case were to be honestly investigated or if a grand jury could open it up, we could get at it,” he said. “I think (people) want to remember a piece of their history that was stolen from them.”

On Saturday, two Xs spray-painted in the street marked the spots where Kennedy was hit as his motorcade drove through the plaza. A placard from the National Park Service stood on the ground directly across from one X.

A short distance from there, Suzanne Guardiola, 47, stood in the crowd with her husband, Moises.

“This is the first memory of something tragic that happened that I ever remember,” she said.

Guardiola recalled how family members responded when they saw footage of Kennedy’s assassination for the first time when the Zapruder film was released 12 years later. Even then, her grandmother cried, she said.

“It reminded everybody that, ‘Yes, this did happen,’” her husband, Moises Guardiola said.

Gathering at the plaza was a way for people to reclaim history, Judge said.

“I think that people loved and respected John Kennedy and I think that that day not only a man died but democracy died,” he said.

For 68-year-old Ann Murphy, news of Kennedy’s assassination stunned her when it reached her and other teachers in Toronto, Canada. She was in disbelief when school officials announced “President Kennedy has been shot in Dallas,” she said.

Murphy stayed glued to her father’s grainy, black-and-white television set for more news on the events unfolding in the United States. She was even more stunned when she saw nightclub owner Jack Ruby shoot the suspect in Kennedy’s assassination, Lee Harvey Oswald, on live television, Murphy said.

“It’s strange that one man’s influence and popularity would extend well outside his own country,” she said from the grassy area of the plaza, infamous for the numerous theories it has sparked.

____

On the Net:

The Sixth Floor Museum, http://www.jfk.org/

The Coalition On Political Assassinations, http://www.politicalassassinations.com/

Bullet analysis in the Dallas Morning News

September 16, 2008 - Leave a Response

The full analysis can be found here

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/img/09-08/0914jfksmall.jpg 

Bullet analysis casts doubt on lone gunman in JFK assassination

 

08:15 PM CDT on Saturday, September 13, 2008

 

 

By MICHAEL E. YOUNG / The Dallas Morning News
myoung@dallasnews.com

 

Use the latest scientific techniques to poke a hole or two in official findings on the Kennedy assassination and suddenly you have lots of new friends – and lots of enemies.

 

Forty-five years after President John F. Kennedy was killed in a Dallas motorcade, the details surrounding his death remain topics of endless debate for those who see conspiracies and those who disagree.

Cliff Spiegelman will testify to that.

The professor of statistics at Texas A&M University organized a six-member team that compared the composition of bullet fragments from the JFK shooting with other bullets from the same manufacturer.

The group found that those fragments weren’t nearly as rare as the government’s expert witness concluded in 1976, when Dr. Vincent P. Guinn determined that all five fragments came from two bullets fired by Lee Harvey Oswald. A third shot missed.

“The claim was made that those five fragments could only have come from two bullets,” Dr. Spiegelman said. “Our research showed it could have been two or more.

“And if it is more than two, there is an increased likelihood that someone else provided one of them.”

Many of the test bullets showed the same “chemical composition,” and one matched fragments from the assassination bullets, he said.

Hence the title of the group’s paper: “Chemical and Forensic Analysis of JFK Assassination Bullet Lots: Is a Second Shooter Possible?” The team was honored by the American Statistical Association with its 2008 Statistics in Chemistry award.

The study doesn’t say there were two or more gunmen, only that the single-gunman theory can’t be supported by science.

Naturally, that triggered “a bit of a buzz,” said Gary Mack, curator of The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza.

“The no-conspiracy folks, they accepted [Dr. Guinn's] analysis without too much questioning,” Mr. Mack said. “But others wondered whether he knew what he was talking about. And the sharp ones were very skeptical that [the one-shooter findings] could be so definitive.”

By allowing the possibility of multiple gunmen, the study quickly made the rounds on Internet sites and conspiracy bulletin boards.

“Do a search of ‘Spiegelman and JFK’ and see how many hits you get,” Dr. Spiegelman said. “Depending on the day, it’s somewhere between 50,000 and 90,000.”

Many readers passed along their own theories.

A minister who had served in Central America told him that a former member of the mob confessed that he helped plan the assassination, Dr. Spiegelman said.

“I got a letter that said, ‘Hey stupid, we had a coup. [Lyndon] Johnson did it.’ “

A phone message from Australia promised to reveal the real killer only if Dr. Spiegelman called back.

And an elderly gent from West, Texas, said he found a weapon like Mr. Oswald’s Carcano rifle in a hotel the day after the assassination. Would Dr. Spiegelman like to see it?

At the same time, others attacked details of the study, citing things like the bullets’ manufacturer, mentioned at one point as Winchester, then as the Western Cartridge Co.

Stuart Wexler, a 32-year-old teacher from New Jersey, joined the team and provided the test bullets, acquired during a two-year search of eBay auctions, shooting sites and online newsgroups.

“Finding those bullets was incredibly tough,” Mr. Wexler said. “There are a lot of Carcano rounds out there, but not a lot of Western Carcano rounds.”

Yes, they were made by Western, which acquired Winchester in 1931, he said.

Even now, a year after the study’s publication, Mr. Wexler is amazed at the response.

“There was a tremendous amount of buzz,” he said. “Unfortunately, a number of the international headlines overstated our conclusions. Some of it was almost pure propaganda.”

It reminded him of something he saw recently on the Onion, a satirical Internet site, in its summary of the news of 1963:

“Kennedy Slain by CIA, Mafia, Castro, LBJ, Teamsters, Freemasons. President shot 129 Times from 43 Different Angles.”

 

CNN vs MLK -a video critique

July 23, 2008 - Leave a Response

Thanks to Reprehensor for making and distributing this

Stone’s ‘JFK’ re-release this November

July 21, 2008 - Leave a Response

http://www.dvdtimes.co.uk/content.php?contentid=68333

Warner Home Video have announced the Region 1 DVD release of JFK (3-Disc Ultimate Collector’s Edition) on 11th November 2008. Oliver Stone’s feature on the story surrounding John F. Kennedy’s assassination returns as a new UCE that includes the previous Two-Disc Special Edition Director’s Cut along with a third disc that features The Kennedys: America’s Emerald Kings, a new documentary from filmmaker Robert Kline based on Thomas Maier’s acclaimed book about five generations of the renowned political family. Unique to the documentary is political and private footage of the Kennedys not widely available to the general public.

The set also contains memorabilia from the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Kennedy Foundation, including reproductions of Kennedy family and presidential photos, letters written by or to John F. Kennedy from J. Edgar Hoover, Lyndon. B. Johnson and more. The UCE also will include a Kennedy campaign button from the National Archives and Records Administration. Of particular distinction is the inclusion of John F. Kennedy’s historic inaugural address and a handwritten letter to his father, Joseph P. Kennedy, Sr.

In addition, the set features a collectible booklet containing production photos and photo cards showcasing the actors in character with a mini bio of their character.

The UCE will retail at $39.98 SRP and the new documentary – The Kennedys: America’s Emerald Kings – will also be available separately priced at $19.97 SRP.

‘JFK and the Unspeakable’ review

July 21, 2008 - One Response

Review by COPA member Bill Kely, http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2008/07/jfk-and-unspeakable.html

JFK And the Unspeakable Why He Died & Why It Matters (Orbis Books, 2008), by James Douglas.

As a sensitive and serious subject, the assassination of President Kennedy has been approached from many different ways by journalists, historians, psychologists, witnesses and even suspects who have acknowledged their roles in a conspiracy.

But James W. Douglas comes down a very different and spiritual path.

A Catholic theologian, anti-war activist, conscientious objector and peace activist, Doublas was slow to connect the death of the President with the constant threat of war, but he did with the help of Thomas Merton, a monk who had attended Cambridge and Columbia.

Merton, whose autobiography The Seven Story Mountain, has been compared to the Confessions of Saint Augustine, thought deeply and wrote often about war and racism (including Peace in the Post-Christian Era), until he was banned from doing so by his order. The prohibition led him to conduct lengthy correspondence with a wide variety of people, including RFK’s wife Ethel Kennedy, Clare Booth Luce, Evora Arca de Sardinia, wife of a Bay of Pigs commander, and Douglas.

“The Unspeakable,” according to Douglas, “is a term Thomas Merton coined at the heart of the sixties after JFK’s assassination – in the midst of the escalating Vietnam war, the nuclear arms race, and the further assassinations of Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, and Robert Kennedy. In each of those soul-shaking events, Merton sensed an evil whose depth and deceit seemed to go beyond the capacity of words to describe.”

“One of the awful facts of our age,” wrote Merton in 1965, “is the evidence that [the world] is stricken indeed, stricken to the very core of its being by the presence of the Unspeakable.”

“The Vietnam War, the race to a global war, and the interlocking murders of John Kennedy, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy were all signs of the Unspeakable,” explains Douglas. “It remains deeply present in our world.”

“Those who are at present so eager to be reconciled with the world at any price must take care not to be reconciled with it under this particular aspect: as the nest of the Unspeakable. This is what too few are willing to see.”

“It is the void that contradicts everything that is spoken even before the words are said;” wrote Merton, “the void that gets into the language of public and official declarations at the very moment when they are pronounced, and makes them ring dead with the hollowness of the abyss. It is the void out of which Eichmann drew the punctilious exactitude of his obedience…”

“In one his letters, Merton even foresaw Kennedy’s murder when he wrote, “I have little confidence in Kennedy, I think he cannot fully measure up to the magnitude of his task, and lacks creative imagination and the deeper kind of sensitivity that’s needed. Too much the Time and Life mentality,…What is needed is really not shrewdness or craft, but what the politicians don’t have: depth, humanity and a certain totality of self-forgetfulness and compassion, not just for individuals but for man as a whole: a deeper kind of dedication. Maybe Kennedy will break through into that some day by miracle. But such people are long marked out for assassination.”

And Douglas argues, Kennedy did have an epiphany, a sudden (or maybe it was a slow and gradual) realization that war could not be fought on the same terms as it was before because of the development of nuclear weapons. Douglas had his own epiphany when he realized that JFK’s conflicts with his own generals and administrators led to his death, the why of his assassination. And now he wants to do something about it.

“When we become more deeply human, as Merton understood the process,” says Douglas, “the wellspring of our compassion moves us to confront the Unspeakable.”

For Douglas, as with most of us, we would prefer not to confront the Unspeakable, but Douglas goes into their Nest, and in this book he reports back what he found there.

“By overlooking the deep changes in Kennedy’s life and the forces behind his death, I contributed to a national climate of denial,” he writes. “Our collective denial to 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 subsequent murders of Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, and Robert Kennedy by the same forces at work in our government – and in 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. The unspeakable is not far away.”

“The unspeakable is not far away. It is not somewhere out there, identical with a government that became foreign to us. The emptiness of the void, the vacuum of responsibility and compassion, is in ourselves. Our citizen denial provides the ground for the government’s doctrine of ‘plausible deniability.’ John Kennedy’s assassination is rooted in our denial of our nation’s crimes in World War II that began the Cold War and the nuclear arms race…By avoiding our responsibility for the escalating crimes of state done for our security, we who failed to confront the Unspeakable opened the door to JFK’s assassination and its cover-up. The Unspeakable is not far away.”

Most important, notes Douglas, “…The story of JFK and the Unspeakable is drawn from the suffering and compassion of many witnesses who saw the truth and spoke it.” Douglas introduces us to those witnesses and lets us hear what they have to say. “In living the truth, we are liberated from the Unspeakable.”

With his chronological time line, and compare and contrast style, Douglas shows that the assassination of President Kennedy was not the work of one lone, deranged gunman, or the act of Cubans, mobsters or renegade government agents, but whatever happened at Dealey Plaza it was a well planned and executed coup d’etat.

By chronologically comparing and contrasting the lives and experiences of Kennedy and his accused assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, Douglas reasonably demonstrates that Oswald was not the lone nut loser that Warren Commission apologists portray, but an active player in the big game, though only as a pawn and patsy.

According to Douglas, the paths that led Oswald and Kennedy to Dealey Plaza were divergent but pushed along by the same hidden forces, with the motive for the assassination found with Kennedy rather than in the mind of his accused assassin.

Like David Talbot’s book Brothers before him, Douglas reframes the Kennedy presidency to include the backstage manipulations that we’ve only recently learned about.

The conflicts with the CIA after the Bay of Pigs, with the Joint Chiefs of Staff during and after the Cuban Missile Crisis, and with the racists in his own party fighting the civil rights revolt, as well as his determination to withdraw from Vietnam and establish a dialog and diplomatic resolution to the Cuban problem, were all forces that set Kennedy up for retaliation by those who made the Unspeakable happen.

Kennedy, more than once, reflected that a Seven Days in May style military coup could occur in the United States if there was a Bay of Pigs type conflict, and then another similar situation, like the Cuban Missile Crisis presented. Then, if there was a third Bay of Pigs type event, Kennedy reasoned, a coup was possible.

Douglas says that Kennedy’s “third Bay of Pigs” was his “Peace Speech” at American University on June 10, 1963, which he reproduces in full as an appendix.

But while being threatening to the military-industrial complex, the American University speech was not the straw that broke the camel’s back if you believe (as I do) that Col. Jose Rivera (USAR) had expressed foreknowledge of the assassination and of Oswald’s patsy role, as early as mid-April, 1963, months before the Peace Speech.

Douglas starts out with a brief, but incomplete chronology at the beginning, but then jumps around a little in his six chapters, each dealing with various people and events that lead up to what happened at Dealey Plaza.

In his first chapter, A Cold Warrior Turns, Douglas show how JFK’s slow evolving epiphany brings him to the realization that war is not the answer, and he turns to backchannel diplomacy when his own administration balks at talking with the enemy (does this sound familiar?).

If the President’s assassin was a real psychotic, lone-nut, spree killer, as the official story makes him out to be, then it could all be explained psychotically, like other real psycho spree killers (Howard Unruh for instance), and it would be disjointed from the real world that the victim inhabited.

But if that lone assassin is Lee Harvey Oswald, then his background, history, personal profile and every attribute we know about him, as well as his associates, indicate that he was a covert intelligence operative affiliated with a domestic, federal intelligence agency/network. (One that is still in operation, I might add – BK)

Oswald’s background fits like a glove into to the covert history of the Cold War, as Douglas so artfully demonstrates by zig zagging the lives of Kennedy, the King, and Oswald, the Pawn, showing how hidden hands put the Pawn into position to checkmate the King.

Limiting his chronology from January 17, 1961, when President Eisenhower gave his farewell address and warned of the “military-industrial-complex,” and ending at 11:21 AM, November 24, 1963, with the murder of Oswald, Douglas focuses on what he deems necessary to conclusively show that JFK was the victim, not only of a conspiracy, but a high level coup. And he succeeds.

Although only 24 years old, Oswald had been involved in at least a half dozen major covert intelligence operations, beginning with his radar monitoring and guarding of the U2 spy plane in Japan. On Holloween, October 31, 1959, Oswald turned his passport, which identified him as an “Import – Export” agent, over to State Department officer Richard Snyder. Oswald threatened to give the Soviets information he had learned in the Marines. Although there is no record of Oswald ever being questioned by the KGB, six months after he defected, Gary Powers was shot down in a U2 over Russia, which forced cancellation of a meeting between Eisenhower and Kruschev.

Douglas speculates that Oswald did tell them. All that was necessary to know in order to shoot down a U2, was the speed and altitude of the plane. Gary Powers himself speculated that Oswald gave the Soviets the information they needed to shoot him down. Oswald, it turns out, had a US Military ID card identical to the card Powers had on him when he was shot down. There was also speculation that Oswald was in attendance at Powers’ trial.

In any case, Oswald was not prosecuted, or even officially debriefed when he returned home with his Russian wife and baby. George De Mohrenschildt, at the request of the CIA’s J. Walton Moore, met the Oswalds and introduced them to his circle of friends, which included Ruth and Michael Paine.

While still under the guidance of De Mohrenschildt, in October, 1962, Oswald got a job at the graphic arts firm Jaggers-Chiles-Stoval, that did work for the Army Security Agency, placing captions on maps and photographs taken by the U2. So during the Cuban Missile Crisis that month, when the President held up photos of Cuban missile sites, the man who would be accused of killing him, may have placed the arrows and captions on those very photographs.

Douglas says that the Oswalds were handed off like a football, from De Mohrenschildt to the Paines. Douglas says that J. Walton Moore, of the Dallas Domestic Contacts Division of the CIA had his longtime contact George de Mohrenschildt meet Oswald, saying that sometime in the summer of 1962 one of Moore’s associates gave him Oswald’s address in Fort Worth, and de Mohrenschildt called Moore on the phone to confirm the mission.

According to Douglas, it was Moore, of the CIA’s Domestic Contacts Division in Dallas who had De Mohrenschildt befriend Oswald, and it was De Mohrenschildt who arranged for the Oswalds to meet Ruth and Michael Paine, who became sponsors and benefactors of the accused assassin and his family.

With the assistance of the Paines, the Oswald family moved to New Orleans in the wake of the Walker shooing, which was later blamed on Oswald. Going into all the sorid details of Oswald in New Orleans, Douglas brings out the founding of the Fair Play for Cuba chapter, the run ins with Carlos Bruingier and the DRE, but doesn’t get into the whole Morley vs. CIA over the Joannides records.

Most important however, Douglas fits in the anti-Castro Cuban training operations, the CIA maritime raids on Cuba and the backchannel negotiations that were suppose to be secretly going on between JFK and Castro.

In the Chapter on Kennedy, Castro and the CIA, Douglas writes that, “It was while John Kennedy was being steered into combat with the CIA and the Pentagon at the Bay of Pigs that Thomas Merton was being blocked from publishing his thoughts on nuclear war by his monastic superiors. Merton, like Kennedy, decided to find another way. The words pouring out of Merton’s typewriter were spilling over from unpublished manuscripts into his Cold War letters.” (p.17)

“On December 31, 1961, Merton wrote a letter anticipating the Cuban Missile Crisis ten months later. It was addressed to Clare Booth Luce, wife of Time-Life-Fortune owner Henry Luce, a Cold War media barron,” who financially supported the maritime raiders, and wrote stories about them for Life. (p.18)

“As Merton challenged the Cold War dogmas of Clare Booth Luce, he was raising similar questions of conscience to another powerfully situated women, Ethel Kennedy…” (p.19) and Merton began to see a change in Kennedy’s political thought.

At a speech the president gave at the University of Washington, Kennedy said, “It is a curious fact that each of these extreme opposites resembles the other. Each believes that we have only two choices: appeasement or war, suicide or surrender, humiliation or holocaust, to be either Red or dead.” (p.19)

Douglas says that JFK’s “fourth Bay of Pigs” was the signing of the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and he notes the role Norman Cousins played, and the methodology he used in changing public opinion on the issue. Douglas notes that the Senate vote on ratification of the treaty, approved by a vote of 80 – 19, was held on September 24, not an unimportant date on the Road to Dallas.

“One pawn in the Cold War who needed a way out before it was too late was a young ex-Marine, Lee Harvey Oswald. In following Kennedy’s path through a series of critical conflicts, we have been moving more deeply into the question: Why was John Kennedy murdered? Now as we begin to trace Oswald’s path, which will converge with Kennedy’s, we can see the emergence of a strangely complementary question: Why was Lee Harvey Oswald so tolerated and supported by the government he betrayed?” (p. 37)

“The same government issued a report that described Oswald as unable “to establish meaningful relationships with other people. He was perpetually disconnected with the world around him. Long before the assassination he expressed his hatred for American society and acted in protest against it….He sought for himself a place in history – a role as the ‘great man’ who would be recognized as having been in advance of his times. His commitment to Marxism and communism appears to have been another important factor in his motivation.” (p.39)

Of course this alleged motive, contrived by the Warren Commission, doesn’t take into account the fact that Oswald, who “sought for himself a place in history,” denied killing anybody and claimed to be a “patsy.”

As Douglas puts it, “If we turn from Warren Report psychology to Cold War history, why was the ex-Marine Lee Harvey Oswald not arrested and charged a year and a half before the assassination when he came back to the United States from the Soviet Union, where he had announced at the American Embassy in Moscow that he would hand over military secrets (about U2 flights) to the Soviets?” (p.39)

“Oswald’s trajectory, which would end up meeting Kennedy’s in Dallas, was guided not by the heavens or fate or even, as the Warren Report would have it, by a disturbed psyche, Oswald was guided by his intelligence handlers. Lee Harvey Oswald was a pawn in the game. He was a minor piece in the deadly game Kennedy wanted to end. Oswald was being moved square by square across a giant board stretching from Atsugi to Moscow to Minsk to Dallas. For the sake of victory in the Cold War, the hands moving Oswald were prepared to sacrifice him and any other piece on the board. However, there was one player, John Kennedy, who no longer believed in the game and was threatening to turn over the board.” (p.41)

In the chapter on JFK and Vietnam, Douglas bring in Operation Northwoods, which many believe was incorporated in the assassination planning.

“On March 13, 1962, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, whom Kennedy inherited from the Eisenhower, General Lyman L. Lemnitzer, proposed ‘Operation Northwoods.’ It’s purpose was to justify a U.S. invasion of Cuba, in which a “Remember the Main incident could be arranged in several forms. We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba…” (p.96-97)

Kennedy rejected Northwoods, and his solution to the Vietnam problem was “Easy” the president said, “Put a government in there that will ask us to leave.” (p.134)

In Marked Out for Assassination, Douglas says that, “Investigative journalist Joseph Trento testified in a 1984 court deposition that, according to CIA sources, James Angleton was the supervisor of a CIA assassination unit in the 1950s. The ‘small assassination team’ was headed by Army colonel Boris Pash. At the end of World War II, Army Intelligence colonel Pash had rounded up Nazi scientists who could contribute their research skills to the development of U.S. nuclear and chemical weapons…” (p.143)

Douglas brings out the individual stories of a number of important witnesses, most of whom we have heard from before, but Boris Pash is one of the few individuals Douglas introduces who has managed to avoid the limelight, even in death.

Douglas gives much play to James Wilcott (p. 146-148), a CIA accountant stationed in Tokyo (1960 – 1964) who claimed that it was common knowledge in the CIA station there that Oswald was an agent who was disbursed CIA funds from a case officer. Both Wilcott and his wife were CIA administrators.

“In the decade following his HSCA testimony,” notes Douglas, “Jim Wilcott joined Vietnam veteran Brian Willson and the Nuremberg Actions community outside the Concord Naval Weapons Station in nonviolent resistance to weapons shipments to the CIA sponsored Contra war in Nicaragua. While sitting on the railroad tracks, Willson was run over by a weapons train, which severed both his legs. Undeterred, Jim Wilcott was arrested for blocking a later train.” (p.147)

We’re going to hear more about Mr. Wilcott, but as Douglas surmises, “Thus, even the assassination of a president could be funded unconsciously by American taxpayers and carried out unknowingly by government employees, while only a few such as CIA Deputy Director for Plans Richard Helms and Counter-intelligence head James Angleton knew the intended result beforehand.” (p.148)

In Saigon and Chicago (Chapter 5), Douglas reinforces the image of Kennedy losing grip on his government, especially in Saigon, where his ambassador Henry Cabot Lodge was pushing for a coup to oust Diem, while Kennedy wanted Lodge to use diplomacy.

It’s quite apparent, in retrospect that Kennedy’s attempt at appeasement of conservative Republicans by appointing two of their own – Lodge in Vietnam and John McCone as head of the CIA, backfired in Kennedy’s face.

There are a few little gems in “The Unspeakable,” like Boris Pash, and Marvin Gheesling (p.177), the FBI agent who, on October 9, 1963, took Oswald off the FLASH notice, effectively “turned off the alarm switch on Oswald literally an instant before it would have gone off.”

While the coup in South Vietnam was being undertaken, the FBI and Secret Service were uncovering a plot to kill the President in Chicago (p.200-207).

“Thomas Vallee had been led along a trail that Lee Oswald would follow after him…” writes Douglas. The ex-Marine who worked at a CIA sponsored Cuban commando training camp in Levittown, Long Island. “Thomas Arthur Vallee and Lee Harvey Oswald, two men under the CIA’s thumb for years, were being set up, one after the other, as scapegoats in two prime sites for killing Kennedy.” (p.205)

In Chicago, Douglas visits the building on the parade route Kennedy would have used, and visits the assassin’s lair where Vallee would have been placed and branded as the assassin if JFK had gone to Chicago that day. Into the Nest of the Unspeakable.

Douglas makes the point that if Kennedy had been killed in Chicago on November 1, we might have known Thomas Arthur Vallee as his deranged, ex-Marine, lone-nut assassin rather than Oswald.

“Lee Harvey Oswald was being systematically set up for his scapegoat role in Dallas, just as Thomas Arthur Vallee had been set up as an alternative patsy in Chicago,” writes Douglas in Washington and Dallas. “Vallee escaped that fate, when two whistleblowers, Chicago Police Lieutenant Berkeley Moyland an FBI informant named ‘Lee,’ stopped the Chicago plot. Oswald was not so fortunate in Dallas. His incrimination by unseen hands continued…” (p.221)

Douglas also outlines the original cover story, that is still propagated in some quarters.

“Just as Chicago was the model for Dallas, Saigon was the backdrop for Chicago….” says Douglas, indicating a connection between what was going on. “…The legend created for the Dallas scenario of the gun-toting malcontent Lee Harvey Oswald followed a similar pattern. From the claims made by a series of CIA officers to the authors of widely disseminated books and articles, John Kennedy had been convicted in his grave of having tried to kill Fidel Castro, whose supposedly deranged surrogate, Lee Harvey Oswald, then retaliated. As a successful Chicago plot would have done, the Dallas plot ended up blaming the victim. ‘Kennedy tried to murder Castro, and got what he deserved.’” (p.218)

Douglas wrote that, “Those who designed the plot to kill Kennedy were familiar with the inner sanctum of our national security state,…The assassins’ purpose seems to have encompassed not only killing a president determined to make peace with the enemy but also using his murder as the impetus for a possile first strike against that same enemy.”

The inclusion of Northwoods in the Dealey Plaza operation is the lynchpin that proves that the bullets that killed the President came from the Pentagon, and the assassination is the most significant national security issue yet to be resolved.

We’ve come to learn a lot since JFK was buried, and one of the most important things we should have learned is that the assassination of President Kennedy was a terrorist attack on our nation, as well as one man, and that we must now, or eventually, come to face the Unspeakable and confront it with the truth we’ve come to know.

As Douglas puts it, “Unknown to ordinary citizens watching President Kennedy’s funeral on their television sets, the agencies of a national security state had quickly formed a united front behind the official mourning scenes to cover up every aspect of JFK’s assassination. National security policies toward enemies beyond the state (with whom the slain president had been negotiating a truce) made necessary the denial of every trace of conspiracy within the state. As a saddled, riderless horse followed the coffin through the capitol’s streets, plausible deniability had come home to haunt the nation.” (p.82)

And now the game tables are being overturned, and what was once kept secret for reasons of national security, must now be revealed for reasons of national security, so the Nest of the Unspeakeable can be confronted and purged.

[ William Kelly, co-founder of the Committee for an Open Archives (COA) and a member of the Coalition on Political Assassinations (COPA) can be reached at bkjfk3@yahoo.com ]

McKinney to open files if elected-Newsweek

July 16, 2008 - One Response

In an interview with Newsweek, Green party presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney says that one of her first acts in office, if elected, would be to open the files on the assassinations of President Kennedy and Martin Luther King

Newsweek

Sponsored By
McKinney Goes Green

Will a third-party candidate be a ’spoiler’?

Katie Paul
Newsweek Web Exclusive
Updated: 12:51 PM ET Jul 15, 2008

Controversy has always been Cynthia McKinney’s trademark. This election season, she may have finally found her perfect political home. Last weekend, the 53-year-old former Georgia congresswoman clinched the Green Party’s presidential nomination; 35-year-old hip-hop artist and activist Rosa Clemente will be her running mate.

A firebrand politician best known for her impolitic statements during her more than 20 years in public life, McKinney has had a mixed electoral record as a Democrat in her district in recent years. After 10 years in office, she was upset in 2002 by fellow Democrat Denise Majette, re-elected in 2004, and ousted again in 2006 by the 4th District’s current Democratic congressman, Rep. Hank Johnson. Most commentators point to her altercation with a U.S. Capitol police officer and her accusations that the Bush administration covered up its role in the 9/11 attacks to explain the losses, but McKinney cites voting irregularities like those highlighted in “American Blackout,” a 2006 documentary that focuses on her career.

McKinney’s nomination brings some name recognition to the Green Party, but it’s unclear how far that will take them this election cycle. The Green Party barely made a dent in the 2004 election, picking up only 119,859 votes, or 0.1 percent of the total. The specter of Ralph Nader’s more successful 2.8 million vote bid in 2000 looms large for Democrats determined to prevent another third party spoiler. McKinney is joined as a non-major-party contender this year by both Nader, running as an independent, and another former U.S. House member from Georgia, Bob Barr, the Libertarian nominee. The troika may increase the number of votes that go to “spoiler” candidates–or merely splinter it.

McKinney’s goal: a full 5 percent of the vote. Checking in with her just before she won the nomination, NEWSWEEK’s Katie Paul spoke with McKinney about her reasons for running and how her campaign might affect the election season. Excerpts:

NEWSWEEK: Is there a story behind your campaign website’s name, RunCynthiaRun?
Cynthia McKinney: It came from California supporters who really, really wanted me to run. I was inclined not to. I had delayed my personal aspirations for so long, but the RunCynthiaRun group just wouldn’t take no for an answer. There’s been a long-standing relationship between me and individual members of the Green Party. They were interested in me in 2000 and again in 2004. I have been requested several times to run as a member of the Green Party. The Greens have never been on the ballot in Georgia because of restrictive ballot access laws. So while I understood that their ideals were in the places that public policy ought to be, people in Georgia just didn’t really know who they were.

You stayed with the Democratic Party until last year. Why the decision to go with the Green Party route now?
The Greens have always been supportive of my political aspirations. My very first political friend was a member of the Green Party. If you view the Youtube clip [of my announcement that I was leaving the Democratic Party], it’s really clear.

What kind of strategy are you employing for the campaign?
There are currently about 200 members of the Green Party who are elected officials. These are mostly local elections. The Green Party does not yet have representation on the federal level, but it’s quite a successful “minor” party. With 5 percent of the electorate, it can move from minor party status to major party status [and qualify the Green Party for federal funds]. So our goal is to get onto as many ballots as we can, since then achieving a 5 percent goal becomes possible. When I got to Washington D.C., I realized that public policy was made around the table. The 5 percent puts another seat at the table.

Tell me about your prospects for getting this 5 percent, since polls are showing that all the third parties combined are only at about 1 percent. That’s a pretty big gap.
Yes, we have our work cut out for us. But I think the fact that Congress has failed to stop funding the war and is aiding and abetting in the illegal spying against American citizens, combined with the fact that we don’t have a livable wage, don’t have single-payer health care system, are not subsidizing higher education as we should be, have not seen a cogent energy policy come through Congress, are seeing people losing their homes in a record foreclosure mortgage crisis — and predatory lending has not been tamed — the Bush tax cuts have not been rolled back, then we certainly can’t trust those who created the problems to solve them.

A lot of those issues sound similar to the Democratic Party platform.
I don’t think that assessment is accurate. The Democrats stand for what we’ve been given now. While many Democratic activists may want a single-payer health care system, neither one of the final two Democratic candidates who were able to garner so many delegate votes were supportive of a single-payer health care system. They have also taken impeachment off the table.

There are quite a few prominent third-party candidates running this year, including your former fellow Congressman from Georgia, Bob Barr, over at the Libertarian Party. Is he basically the conservative version of you?
The only thing I would say about Bob is that it’s interesting that Georgia is so well-represented in the non-major party lineup. Of course, I worked in the Congress for a long time with Bob Barr and, in fact, members of the Libertarian Party have reached out to me on several occasions this year and I expect there will be more mutual reaching.

So you might actually be working together on some issues?
I didn’t say that.

What does mutual reaching mean then?
It means that where there is the possibility of having discussions, then I wouldn’t turn down discussions. There’s nothing afoot, if that’s what you mean. I would take it issue by issue, and see what the future brings.

Of course, there’s the perennial third-party candidate question: What do you make of arguments that you’ll pull votes away from the Democrats, thereby ushering into office a Republican who shares even fewer of your views?
That’s not grounded in the facts. As the film “American Blackout” points out very well, there were numerous instruments used in the 2000 and 2004 elections to disfranchise voters. Voter caging and voter ID laws exist to disfranchise voters. The question I believe Newsweek ought to be asking is how can we ensure that people who have the right to vote also have the opportunity to vote. And after their vote is cast, how can we ensure their votes are counted. How can an environment that does not ensure election integrity ensure us that the will of the voter is reflected in the announced outcome?

So it doesn’t concern you that taking even 1 percent away from a major political party could result in four more years of policies that differ even more drastically from those of the Green Party?
That’s your language, not my language. I gave you my take, but you haven’t accepted my take. Maybe you would feel differently if your vote wasn’t counted. In an environment where people vote their values, we must have election integrity where every vote is counted. We didn’t have that in 2000 and 2004 and neither the Democrats nor the Republicans did anything about it. But in 2004, the Green Party did something about it.

The last time you made big headlines was in 2006, with the incident involving the Capitol Police, and that was far from the only controversy that’s come up in your political career. Has that been a problem for you during this campaign?
People care first and foremost that their votes are counted, people want the United States out of war and occupation, people want to have access to healthcare, people don’t want to have to sleep in their cars because they’ve lost their homes. I think the fact that former GAO comptroller David Walker is making a comment that our fiscal house is not in order-those are the issues weighing heavily on people’s minds and those are the issues that I talk about.

If you were to be elected, what would be item number one on the McKinney agenda?

Is it OK if I do several things simultaneously [laughs]? First of all, we have to instruct the Joint Chiefs of Staff to draw up an orderly withdrawal process for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. We would also begin work immediately on a budget to submit to Congress that satisfies human needs and doesn’t reflect corporate greed as the current budget does. I would also remind the members of Congress swept into office with me as the New Broom Coalition that we could initiate impeachment proceedings.

Also, I would make public the papers pertaining to certain tragedies in the life of our country, like the JKF assassination, Martin Luther King Jr., and the 9/11 Truth Movement-I would release everything the Bush administration knew about September 11.

One more thing I would do is begin the process of putting into place a Department of Peace. It would be wonderful to rename the Department of State as the Department of Peace and have our ambassadors go around the world with a mission…to begin their engagement in the world based on human rights and peace.

You were earning your Ph.D. at Berkeley recently, right?
Let’s put it this way; I’ve deferred one time too many. But I’m hoping to enroll in some institution once again in January.

In January? That’s not very optimistic [about the election outcome], is it?
Well, I might have to take another deferral in that case.

URL: http://www.newsweek.com/id/146263

UPI story on RFK assassination

July 15, 2008 - Leave a Response

Some want RFK assassination revisited

There are valid reasons to re-examine the 1968 assassination of Robert F. Kennedy to determine if Sirhan Sirhan really acted alone, conspiracy proponents say. Paul Schrade, the labor adviser to Kennedy’s presidential campaign who also was wounded in the shooting that left Kennedy dead in Los Angeles 40 years ago, said today’s technology can help prove others were involved, the New York Daily News reported Monday. “I’m convinced we can make the case,” said Schrade, who is assembling a legal team to challenge the verdict that put Sirhan, now 64, behind bars. Shane O’Sullivan, author of “Who Killed Bobby?,” questions the verdict based on evidence he says shows multiple shots came from more than one direction. A security guard implicated by audio analysis of the shots has denied he shot Kennedy, the Daily News said. The Kennedy clan is reluctant to push to have the case reopened. Bobby Kennedy Jr. told the News that while he suspects the assassination of his uncle, President John F. Kennedy, may have been a conspiracy, he has “never seen particularly compelling evidence” that was the case in his father’s death. Sandi Gibbons, spokeswoman for Los Angeles District Attorney Steve Cooley, said while she didn’t know if prosecutors knew of the recent analyses, they “believe Sirhan’s conviction is valid and supported by the evidence presented to a jury at trial.”