River Valley Blogs

Jane Seymour wrote on Apr 18, 2009 11:46 AM:

" He was shot from the front, the government covered it up, and he was trying to change things in ways that would strip away the power of behind-the-scenes goverment and military actions. These three pieces of evidence are undeniably true. Now, just fill in the thousands of pieces of evidence that all point to both a second gunman and a government-size cover up. All that is needed is a major scandal to bring it all to light, and make the goverment acknowledge it.

One of the worst thing about the denial are the people who say Oliver Stone was "wrong". What they fail to mention is what he was wrong *about*: the Clay Shaw case, which was heavily fabricated because about half of Garrison's witnesses mysteriously died before trial. The physical evidence, and the testimony about both government actions and the facts surrounding the case are not made up. "

Bugs to Richard wrote on Jan 22, 2008 11:36 AM:

" The 'elite' in Washington knew very well that Bush 41 was an agent upon his graduation from Yale, and that, of course, went into their thinking when they chose him for the head job. This didn't come out and was purposely ignored at his confirmation hearings, because Bush had already served a term or two in Congress, while he was a CIA agent. A CIA agent elected to Congress? That wouldn't play very well with John Q Public. "

Richard Cranium wrote on Jan 18, 2008 9:16 PM:

" To Bugs: Sounds very intriguing... How in the world though would Bush the smarter be named Director of the CIA when he claims never to have worked for them? Didn't ANYONE question his back round at all? "

Michael Welch: The LAST Real "President Of The United States"... wrote on Jan 18, 2008 10:24 AM:

" I tend to 'rate' American presidents by what they have AVOIDED doing than by what they've done -- which is usually detrimental to humane interests. The Kennedy administration was ponderously cold warish in its obsession with Castro (not a 'fave' of mine but a CUBAN problem initially; he did not HAVE to becomes 'ours') and mincing about in se Asia as well as in boisterous confrontations over 'Ich bin ein' etc. But post-Oct '62 as I said Kennedy -- to use the present trendy term -- 'changed' not into a raving 'socialist' combo of John Reed and Emma Goldman but into a prez who decided peace is indeed 'better' than war and did some palpable things (the test ban treaty should NOT be treated as 'minor') and planned others. And then 'they' killed him and that was that... "

rick harsch wrote on Jan 17, 2008 12:21 PM:

" Harrison dies--this remains the best presidential record in American history. "

Bugs to Rick wrote on Jan 17, 2008 9:08 AM:

" He was our greatest president because of what he was going to do. At least that's my opinion. "

Bugs to Richard wrote on Jan 17, 2008 9:06 AM:

" More on Papa Bush: There was an FBI memo back at the time of the assassination that stated that a George Bush of the CIA had contacted them regarding a threat to JFK by an individual known as James Perrot. Papa Bush denied being this George Bush-said it was another George Bush. But that didn't pan out. The probable truth, then, is that Papa Bush became a CIA agent soon after his graduation from Yale, where he was "Skull and Bones"-the mysterious fraternity where many agents are recruited from. His cover was the oil business. "

Bugs to Richard wrote on Jan 17, 2008 8:57 AM:

" I don't think its ever been established that Papa Bush was in Dallas on the 22nd, though police chief Jesse Curry had a picture in a book he wrote of a man standing outside the book depository that bore a strong resemblance to Papa Bush. For many years, Papa stated that he couldn't remember where he was on 11/22/63. Yeah, right. "

rick harsch wrote on Jan 17, 2008 5:18 AM:

" I agree--if it's called Oswald's Ghost...an amazing title. The only lingering disagreement I have with Bugs is that I don't see how Kennedy could have been the best president ever if he was killed before he actually did what ostensibly got him killed. So I continue to believe that the best president ever was the one with the in office C.V.: Harrison dies. "

Richard Cranium wrote on Jan 16, 2008 10:03 PM:

" A couple of the things that I have always wondered about was... what was George H W Bush doing in Dallas the day of Kennedy's murder and how did he get to become the Director of the CIA year's later (I know he was appointed)when he claims to have never worked for them. In other words, no experience in the Department that he's the Director of...? "

Bugs Raplin wrote on Jan 16, 2008 1:29 PM:

" In my last post, I meant to say those who did it (killed JFK and covered it up) are responsible for the horrific consequences that have followed. In October '63 on the front page of the New York Times, an article by Arthur Krock detailed how the CIA was disregarding Kennedy's orders vis a vis Southeast Asia. Krock then stated that if there ever was a coup d etat in America, it would come from the CIA. Now, we're not talking about the La Crosse Tribune here, this is the New York Times. Certainly, JFK was aware that he was in danger. He had become a threat to the system and the CIA did, indeed, remove him from office. "

Bugs To Rick wrote on Jan 16, 2008 12:47 PM:

" Well, I sure didn't mean to distract from the consequences of JFK's assassination. I think Jimmy said it best by saying it's hard to divorce the "who dunnit" aspect from the consequences. Thiose who did are responsible for the consequences. Most young people may not realize it but 11/22/63 was the watershed moment in our nation's history. A cold war imperial president actually "changed" mid-term and began trying to make America live up to its ideals rather than pay lip service to them. When one ponders all the innocents who've lost their lives as the result of American foreign policy since '63, one can begin to grasp the heroism of John F. Kennedy, our greatest president. "

Michael Welch: If A Tree Falls And No One Is Around Is There A Sound?... wrote on Jan 16, 2008 12:43 PM:

" Mention the assassination and one ought to speak of the 'cicumstances' -- the PBS documentary is after all titled 'Oswald's Ghost' and seems to have implied the 'Warren' explanation eh? The IMPACT was large THEN -- and historical impacts linger even if most folks become ignorant of them. Not many other than JG, Rick, 'Bugs,' Marc and I seem to have read much re: JFK so the initial skepticism petered away into -- the Wehrs thesis of indifference? 'Bugs' basically says 'All that followed turned to dross' and I resisted that view for years but now I endorse it; it just appears to be the socio-political reality we share like it or not, REALIZE it or not... "

harsch to bugs wrote on Jan 16, 2008 10:59 AM:

" my point is that the discussion derailed from the consequences of kennedy's death, that as it seems virtually impossible to deny that he was assassinated by some combination of elements that had to include the u.s. government all the discussion about how he was killed was beside the point. but i didn't see the tv show, so i may be wrong. also, even if the discussion derailed that direction i'm sure some readers learned something from your posts. I had not known that the line attributed to lbj in the stone movie was a quote from karnow's book (which is, by the way, a fairly moderate description of the war). "

Michael Welch: Ancient Evenings In The Long Lost Sixties... wrote on Jan 16, 2008 10:49 AM:

" Perhaps like 'Bugs,' I sometimes find the flinty skepticism re: the Kennedy assassination coming from 'liberals' or 'leftists' rather puzzling. If we were discussing the administration per se I would have MANY criticisms but essentially I think 'the record' does show that -- hard as it is to comprehend -- Jack Kennedy was indeed a unique president because he actually CHANGED HIS MIND with experience. The Oct '62 missile crisis may be deemed 'ancient history' now but the world NEVER came closer to 'armageddon' before or since. No dreck Cisco! Because it happened a million billion eons ago in present perceptions and 'knowledge' doesn't mean it was insignificant. It CHANGED people -- including the youngish president AND even his ratty brother Bobby... "

Bugs Raplin wrote on Jan 16, 2008 7:54 AM:

" The conversation appears to be over, but I would just add this. Vietnam policy changed within two days of JFK's death when LBJ issued National Security Memo 273, which stated the US intention in Vietnam was to "win" the war. As reported by Stanley Karnow, LBJ told the Joint Chiefs in December '63, "just get me elected, I'll give you your damn war." So, who benefited from the assassination? LBJ, the CIA, and the military-industrial-intelligence complex. War, after all, is good for business. "

Bugs to Harsch wrote on Jan 16, 2008 7:48 AM:

" Rick, I often have trouble comprehending your stuff. Probably my own fault. I'm hardly an intellectual like yourself. Anyhow, from my perspective, you've got this murder of a president in Dallas. You treat it as a crime scene. You look at the evidence that has emerged over the years. You then conclude, based on the evidence, that the explanation given by the government is ludicrous. Then you start asking questions. The most important being who benefited? It's pretty simple. The formula can be applied more or less to other events like 9/11, Waco, OKC, RFK, MLK etc. "

Harsch wrote on Jan 15, 2008 7:23 PM:

" I think it is strange that the discussion has to devolve to whether oswald killed jfk, but apparently it had to. Why is that? isn't that a known, as they say? "

Bugs to Jimmy wrote on Jan 15, 2008 12:52 PM:

" We disagree on the program's slant, obviously, but I thank you for the topic. If there's one thing I enjoy it's tearing apart mainstream faux documentaries like the one that aired on PBS last night. There's this perception by many liberals that PBS and NPR are somehow above the fray-that they are more trustworthy. I've found that to be untrue. Theirs is simply a more subtle propaganda, more deadly in fact than the stuff we get from Charlie, Katie, and Brian. "

Bugs Raplin wrote on Jan 15, 2008 12:45 PM:

" A source sometimes cited by Noam Chomsky in his writings on foreign policy is the military newspaper, Stars and Stripes. As most people familiar with Chomsky know, his sources are almost always reliable. Anyhow, an October '63 Stars and Stripes headline stated, "JFK to Withdraw Troops from Vietnam in '65" "

Michael Welch: "Death To All Who Whimper And Cry!"... wrote on Jan 15, 2008 12:22 PM:

" I wasn't able to see the documentary so I can't judge it but I do know that more and more historians of that 'era' have become far more skeptical re: the Warren report nostrums; and a consensus that Kennedy was becoming -- horrors! -- an American president against war is developing too. I suggest Jack's death was indeed more 'important' than James Garfield's to this country and remains a great tragedy for reasons other than 'the young president cut down in his prime' etc.... "

From Jimmy wrote on Jan 15, 2008 12:04 PM:

" First, I think Rick Harsch, Mark Wehrs and Mike Welch are right on in that the post was about the impact of the JFK murder, not about who committed it, although the two are difficult to separate, so the comments regarding conspiracies and the like are understandable and, to that extent, pertinent. Second, I thought, if anything, "Oswald's Ghost" gave more credence and spent more time on the possibility of a conspiracy and was not slanted towards a belief in Oswald as the lone gunman. Obviously, some felt differently. As always, thanks for everyone's comments! "

Michael Welch: But Do We Care?... wrote on Jan 15, 2008 11:16 AM:

" It may well be as Marc Wehrs says that the assassination is no longer 'traumatizing' simply because -- as Harsch indicates -- we've learned to 'accept' it as well as the murders of King and Bobby Kennedy plus the sordid machinations of Watergate, Iran-contra, the Panama slaughter in '89, the set-up of Saddam in 1990 and perhaps 9-11 without much effect on the 'maintenance' of the system. Swallow one 'magic trick' and others can follow -- 'Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!' In 'The Wizard of Oz' Dorothy and her friends recognize and NAME 'fraud' for what it is but maybe Marc's right; maybe most folks today really don't care. But that shouldn't be a 'boast' should it?... "

Michael Welch: Even More... wrote on Jan 15, 2008 11:07 AM:

" John Newman's study 'JFK and Vietnam' does a fine job of detailing Kennedy's growing skepticism and subsequent decision to 'get out' but AFTER the 1964 election in which K figured he'd be running against militarist 'hawk' AZ Sen. Barry Goldwater and wished to avoid a 'soft on communism' label. Recent books by David Talbot ('Brothers') and Berton Hersh's 'Bobby and J. Edgar [Hoover],' also show how Jack's increasing doubts about the CIA and the military were leading him to withdrawal. Kennedy was an important president in that he was seeking real 'detente' ten years before Nixon and also because he was, I am convinced. killed by a covert intra-government conspiracy... "

Michael Welch: More On JFK, Vietnam, Et. Al.... wrote on Jan 15, 2008 10:58 AM:

" 'Bugs' mentioned the important American University speech (written by the Quaker pacifist and WWII conscientious objector Theodore Sorenson) which followed the Kennedy decision to effect what was called the 'atmospheric nuclear test ban treaty' with the USSR which prohibited tests of nuclear weapons in the 'open air.' The US military -- especially Curtis LeMay's air force -- was vehemently against it. As far as Vietnam a number of close Kennedy aides like Kenneth O'Donnell and Paul Fay have confirmed his plans to withdraw; and JFK had ordered 1000 'advisers' back for Christmas '63 -- cancelled after his murder by the new president Lyndon Johnson... "

Bugs to 5:22 am wrote on Jan 15, 2008 8:30 AM:

" Even the flawed documentary last night stated 70% of the American people believe a conspiracy killed JFK. "

Bugs to Mikey wrote on Jan 15, 2008 8:29 AM:

" The speech JFK made at American University in the summer of '63 is crucial evidence of the direction Kennedy intended to take the country in regard to its relations with the Soviet Union. "

Bugs Raplin wrote on Jan 15, 2008 8:22 AM:

" More deception from "The American Experience"-the program omitted comments made by Jack Ruby that he made towards the end of his life that the conspiracy reached the highest levels of American government and that a "whole new form of government" would occur as the result of the assassination. Prophetic indeed. "

Bugs Raplin wrote on Jan 15, 2008 8:19 AM:

" More deception from "The American Experience"-the program failed to mention that Jim Garrison did convince the jury in the Clay Shaw trial that JFK died as the result of a conspiracy; the jury just didn't have enough evidence to believe Shaw was part of that conspiracy. At the trial, Shaw denied any involvment with the CIA, but it was later admitted by Richard Helms that Shaw was a CIA operative. "

Bugs Raplin wrote on Jan 15, 2008 8:15 AM:

" More dishonesty from "The American Experience"-the program's key talking head for the Oswald did it theory was Norman Mailer who went on and on about Oswald having the means, the motive, and the opportunity. As to motive, even the Warren Commission could not come up with a motive. A common belief is that Oswald did it for the glory-to make a name for himself. If so, why did he continually deny the crime and ask for legal assistance. As to opportunity, Oswald was on the second floor eating lunch at the time of the assassination. As to means, the alleged weapon was defective. "

Marc Wehrs wrote on Jan 15, 2008 8:14 AM:

" To say that Kennedy's assassination is still traumatizing 'us' might be inaccurate. Boomers who believed that Kennedy was somehow 'different' from the pols before and after ... for them, yes, it remains traumatic. (I'd argue he was the most eloquent and charismatic politician since FDR, but the solid evidence that he was truly better is scant.) And now we have a couple of generations of voters for whom Kennedy's assassination is about as traumatizing as that of James Garfield. Nineteen sixty-three is ancient history for children of the 1970s and '80s. "

Bugs Raplin wrote on Jan 15, 2008 8:03 AM:

" More deception from "The American Experience." The program mentioned the "Magic Bullet Theory" but there was no critical analysis of this theory, which the entire conclusion of the Warren Commission is based upon. If you believe that a bullet can change direction in mid-air, cause 6 or 7 wounds to JFK and Governor Connallly, and then be found in pristine condition on a stretcher in Parkland Hospital, then you obviously are one of the few people who stand by the Warren commission. "

Bugs Raplin wrote on Jan 15, 2008 7:52 AM:

" More dishonesty from "The American Experience"-the program denigrated a key witness in Jim Garrison's trial against Clay Shaw named Perry Russo. Russo stated that he attended a party in late summer '63 where Shaw, Oswald and David Ferrie discussed killing JFK in a triangulation of gunfire. Shaw denied knowing Oswald and Ferrie. After Shaw's acquittal, a photograph surfaced showing Oswald, Ferrie, and Shaw together. The program last night never mentioned that "

Bugs Raplin wrote on Jan 15, 2008 7:45 AM:

" The program last night was not balanced. I'd say 80% of it was pro-Warren Commission. Worse than that, it was dishonest. For example, there were clips from Dan Rather in 1963 where Dan would say something and then it was fast-forwarded and then Dan would speak again. A unique way to eliminate a vital part of what Rather said, which was his reporting of the Zapruder film, where Dan told the American people that JFK was thrown violently forward from the fatal bullet. Just the opposite occurred, so one can conclude that Rather lied and this was intentionally not mentioned in the program. "

rick harsch wrote on Jan 15, 2008 5:38 AM:

" more funny business on the Gillman blog. Welchy and Joan are gratuitously (I wouldn't have it any other way) tossed in. But for the main part the apparent and perhaps real need to explain that Kennedy was not killed by Oswald, or Oswald alone, derails the discussion from the apparent point that the assassination was a turning point of the worst kind. My quick take on that is that Watergate was the point from which the country will never recover, for a media stunted populace quickly became tired of such kinds of complex and dark news of the machinations of people in power, so that they began absorbing the morality of the Nixonians, and gradually became immune to political crime, which has allowed for two consecutive terms of incredible scandals that are swallowed like saturated cocoa puffs. "

To Jimmy, Mikey & Chip wrote on Jan 15, 2008 5:22 AM:

" From ABC News regarding their Poll on JFK assassination "In a new follow-up question, fewer than half of Americans, four in 10, say they're "pretty sure" there was a plot; another three in 10 say it's just a hunch. Similarly, half of those who suspect a second shooter say this, too, is just their hunch." That's not quite the Majority you make it out to be. A �hunch� is nice, but people don�t �go to the bank� on a �hunch�.
"

Mikey wrote on Jan 15, 2008 5:11 AM:

" Please cite your sources as to you statement that "JFK decided then to inaugurate real 'detente' with the Sovs, to get out of Vietnam". I think you are rewriting history. "

Richard Cranium wrote on Jan 14, 2008 10:04 PM:

" Good show! Oh Chip... where are you? What did you think of it? "

Michael Welch: "Coup D'etat" -- In America!... wrote on Jan 14, 2008 11:56 AM:

" John F. Kennedy began his administration as a 'cold warrior,' i. e. as a 1940s-50s 'liberal' in the Truman mode; in this he was not in fact appreciably different from his 1960 opponent Vice President Richard Nixon who by the way was considered one of the most liberal in the Eisenhower administration re: black civil rights. Kennedy as president went through two 'traumas,' one the Bay of Pigs, the CIA-sponsored invasion of Castroite Cuba that went awry, and the other the October '62 'Cuban missile crisis,' a result of the former. JFK decided then to inaugurate real 'detente' with the Sovs, to get out of Vietnam, push for a comprehensive civil rights bill and a 'war on poverty' program. His 'turn to the left' so to speak became his undoing; and so we have had a 'coup d'etat' in the US and many don't even realize it occurred!... "

Bugs Raplin wrote on Jan 14, 2008 10:34 AM:

" JFK was naive enough to think that he was in charge-that he could withdraw from Vietnam and shatter the CIA into a thousand pieces and pursue detente with the Soviet Union. Those objectives did not fit the 'imperial' game plan, so he was removed. It was an object lesson for all future presidents-don't mess with the military-industrial-intelligence complex and its imperial foreign policy. And none have. "

Michael Welch: Don't You Get It?!... wrote on Jan 14, 2008 10:32 AM:

" The real result of the assassination, along with those of Martin Luther King Jr and the president's brother, alter ego and once 'co-president' Robert F. 'Bobby' Kennedy, has been to tamp down 'change' -- candidates may say the word often but the actions of presidents since the '60s have been to reduce efforts for actual social and economic changes and increase the likelihood of more and more 'overseas adventures.' Stone's sequel to 'JFK,' his '95 'Nixon' depicts the covert machinations that ensured the Vietnam war and led to Nixon's resignation as firmly linked to 'Track II,' the assassination project. Not as successful as 'JFK' I nevertheless recommend 'Nixon' highly as a penetrating look at what is called rightly 'the secret government'... "

Bugs Raplin wrote on Jan 14, 2008 10:29 AM:

" If you look at the forensics of the case, you have to conclude JFK was also hot from the front. All the doctors and nurses at Parkland Hospital initially described JFK's throat wound as one of entrance. The fact that a good chunk of the back of JFK's head was blasted out is further proof of a shot from the front, as is the fact that his body was thrown violently backward when the fatal bullet struck. "

Bugs Raplin wrote on Jan 14, 2008 10:23 AM:

" The media personality (I won't call him a journalist) who did the most to cover up the conspiracy that killed JFK was Walter Cronkite. CBS had, for a long time, employed CIA operatives in its news division. I suggest Cronkite was one. "

Michael Welch: It's A Mystery! Inside A Riddle! Wrapped In An Enigma!... wrote on Jan 14, 2008 10:20 AM:

" It took me some time but I finally became convinced that President Kennedy was assassinated by a cabal that included the CIA, military 'black ops' and an 'executive action' consisting of various hyper-rightists with business-mafia connections. Lee Harvey Oswald, an FBI 'asset,' I believe was indeed 'the patsy' and that Big Jim Garrison's New Orleans prosecutor's office was able to penetrate the basic elements of 'the conspiracy' though of course that investigation was smeared and trashed by the federal government via a compliant media. Ollie Stone's really great 1991 film 'JFK' is the aptest (as well as most entertaining) 'primer' if you know very little. See it... "

Bugs Raplin wrote on Jan 14, 2008 10:16 AM:

" Opinion polls over the last 30 years consistently have revealed that between 70% and 80% of the population do not believe the government explanation. Yet if you ask any former president or most all of the current presidential aspirants, they'll all say Oswald acted alone. Now that is telling. "

Casual Observer wrote on Jan 14, 2008 10:13 AM:

" From some of the other blogs, it looks like a better question will be whether Michael Welch will ever get over Joan. That drama aside, another aspect that makes the JFK thing so fascinating is the prevalence of conspiracy theories. "

Bugs Raplin wrote on Jan 14, 2008 10:10 AM:

" No, we'll never get over the Kennedy assassination, because people know they haven't been told the truth about it. And I hardly trust PBS to give us an honest account. "

Comments »

Post a comment (150 word limit) »