
Investigators say files could prove interference
by Brian Bender, At: The Boston Globe
Current items culled from external sources and which are of interest to the topics treated on this site.
A Federal appeals court says the CIA doesn’t have to reveal information about the Bay of Pigs.
by Josh Gerstein, At: Politico
by Sherry Jacobson
Fifty years ago, «JFK» collapsed in his state convertible while riding through the streets of Dallas, Texas, struck down by several bullets. John Fitzgerald Kennedy, 35th President of the United States (a Democrat), was assassinated the 22 of October [November, (ntr)], 1963, and still today, the truth about this crime has not yet been officially established.
Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, at that time Minister of Finance for General de Gaulle, became aware of the event that stupefied the world “in a remarkable manner”. “I left my office in the Louvre in order to catch a plane to Villacoublay, on the way to the Auvergne, and on the sidewalk to the right, there was a middle-aged man who was gesturing excitedly: he raised his arm, as if he were hitch-hiking”, the former head of state relates for the microphones of RTL.
“I said to myself, ‘what’s going on, what could be happening?’, continues Valéry Giscard d’Estaing. We slowed down, I rolled down the window, he leaned over and said to me, ‘The President of the United States was just assassinated, I heard it on the radio, I immediately came out of my house in order to spread the word everywhere.’ And he burst into sobbing. Here was someone who had been so traumatized that he could not keep the news to himself.”
For the one who performed the highest functions of state from 1974 to 1981, the emotion of this anonymous figure mirrors the shock felt by “all the French” that day. “Because in the assassination of Kennedy, there is in a sense the idea of the assassination of a dream”, he says. “When one murders a dream, it is not just the person who is murdered, the dream is killed together with [that person].”
The former French President incidentally revealed a few tasty tidbits concerning his relationship with the emblematic American head of state, whom he met in the Oval Office. “He asked me for advice!”, notably on inflation, he lets on. As for the atmosphere which reigned at the White House during that period, “it was youthfulness which was in power. Youth, which wanted to change the world. He profoundly inspired me”, he confides.
But if the myth was not extinguished with the man, a blur remains over the true reasons for his death. One man, Lee Harvey Oswald, was rapidly apprehended; he was accused of having fired upon the young President three times with a carbine in a moment favored by fate. He was never brought to trial, murdered less than 48 hours after his questioning.
Two official inquiries, whose conclusions are controversial, confirm his guilt: the Warren Commission, in 1974 [1964 (ntr)], and the Stokes [commission, i.e., HSCA (ntr)], from 1976 to 1978. But innumerable theories claim something else: for the conspiracists, Oswald was supposedly remote-controlled by the CIA, the FBI or the extreme Right, depending on the version.
“Gerald Ford (president of the United States from 1974 to 1977, editor’s note) was a member of the Warren Commission”, Valéry Giscard d’Estaing resumes. “Once I was making a car trip with him, he was then President as I was myself. I said to him: ‘Let me ask you an indiscreet question: you were on the Warren Commission, what conclusions did you arrive at?’ He told me: “It’s not a satisfactory [i.e., positive (ntr)] one. We arrived at an initial conclusion: it was not the work of one person, it was something set up. We were sure that it was set up. But we were not able to discover by whom.”
“Thus there was an organization, which has never been brought to light, which detested, which hated or which feared President Kennedy, and which decided to get rid of him. That is my conviction”, the former head of state decisively concludes. Whence we come to learn that two former presidents among the most powerful of their era support the theory of a conspiracy.

(originally a Chicago Tribune commentary, 9-18-13)
In his opinion article “Who needs facts when you have conspiracy theorists?” (Sept. 6), Cory Franklin asserts that the film JFK is “far removed from historical accuracy” and “is full of distortions and outright falsehoods,” yet he offers not a single specific example. As co-screenwriters of the film, we want to assure Franklin and your readers that we made every effort to be as accurate and true to historical fact as possible.

The film is based on two source-noted nonfiction books and two years of our own additional research, including hundreds of interviews. We have published an annotated screenplay, JFK: The Book of the Film, that provides source notes for every fact in the film and labels clearly what is speculation, where there has been compositing of characters and where dramatic license has been taken.
Franklin’s labeling of the film as “a propaganda piece meant to demonize a covert, evil, right-wing paramilitary group” makes us wonder if he has ever seen the film. It bears no resemblance to the film we made, which depicts various scenarios of what might have happened in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, but most prominently explores the possibility that the CIA was involved.
Franklin repeats the Warren Commission’s long-discredited conclusion that “Lee Harvey Oswald shot President John F. Kennedy,” but offers zero evidence to support this claim. The facts lead to a very different conclusion.
Our film does not come to a firm conclusion about who was responsible for the Kennedy assassination, but it does reject the Warren Commission’s lone-gunman theory as implausible at best – a conclusion that 90 percent of the American people share, according to polls.
Finally, Franklin attempts to tarnish the reputation of former New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison by saying that his case against Clay Shaw, charged with conspiring to assassinate Kennedy, was “quickly laughed out of court.” The truth is that Garrison’s case was sabotaged by the federal government and never had a fair day in court. Every one of Garrison’s attempts to extradite key witnesses from other states was rejected – something that had never happened in his six previous years as district attorney. His routine requests for important evidence such as X-rays and photos from the president’s autopsy, andtax records and intelligence files on Oswald, were denied. Federal prosecutors refused to serve his subpoenas on CIA officials such as Allen Dulles and Richard Helms. Garrison’s office phones were tapped, and Garrison and his staff were followed by FBI agents. Key witnesses were bribed or died under mysterious circumstances. And the district attorney’s files were stolen and turned over to Shaw’s defense counsel before the trial began.
Not the least of these successful efforts at sabotage was the attempt to destroy Garrison’s personal credibility. We know now, as a result of released Freedom of Information documents, that defamatory and false articles about Garrison were planted in the mainstream press as part of a smear campaign orchestrated by the CIA to discredit critics of the Warren Commission. All of these facts are source-noted in our annotated screenplay.
We worked closely with Garrison for several years and knew him well. He was an honest, highly intelligent and courageous man. We believe the American people, including Cory Franklin, should thank Garrison for standing up for the truth about the JFK assassination against the full power of the United States government’s cover-up.
by Joseph Cannon
At: Cannonfire

The evidence at this point I think is very,
very convincing that it was not a lone gunman.Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Jan. 11, 2013
On the evening of January 11th, Charlie Rose interviewed Robert Kennedy Jr. and his sister Rory in Dallas at the Winspear Opera House. This was part of Mayor Mike Rawlings hand chosen committee’s year long program of celebrating the life and presidency of John F. Kennedy. In fact, Rawlings introduced the program. He probably did not like how it turned out, for during this interview Kennedy Jr. said that his father thought the Warren Report was a “shoddy piece of craftsmanship” and he was “fairly convinced” that others were involved. Robert Jr. himself thought that the evidence in the JFK case, “…at this point I think is very, very convincing that it was not a lone gunman.”
To my knowledge, this is the first time that a member of the Kennedy family has stated these sentiments in public. Kennedy Jr. went further and backed up the idea, widely held by many that RFK “publicly supported the Warren Commission report but privately he was dismissive of it.” He added “He was a very meticulous attorney. He had gone over reports. He was an expert at examining issues and searching for the truth.”
![]() |
| The Associated Press |
Once this story hit the wires, it created a mini-sensation. Cable and network news programs did segments on it; hundreds of Internet outlets and newspapers carried the story. This really sums up how cloistered and controlled our news media is even today, with cable channels and the Internet now on the scene. The only thing new about this story is what I mentioned above: the fact that a member of the Kennedy family was saying it in public. As of this writing, there is no official transcript available of this interview, nor is there an audio or videotape which seems odd since it was recorded in front of cameras. Since Dallas Mayor Rawlings was there as the taboo subject was mentioned maybe it is not so odd. But clearly, people should contact Rawlings’ office and ask that this interview be placed on the web immediately. Therefore, people can write articles based upon the actual exchange instead of reporters’ stories about the exchange.
The fact that RFK did not buy into the Warren Report, and he only endorsed it in public for political reasons, this has been established for quite some time. In 2007 David Talbot, in his book Brothers, clearly showed that Bobby Kennedy never bought into the Oswald-did-it line. That from the moment he learned of his brother’s death he suspected a plot had been behind it. (Click for a review)
He “publicly supported the Warren Commission report but privately he was dismissive of it.” He added “He was a very meticulous attorney. He had gone over reports. He was an expert at examining issues and searching for the truth.“
RFK, Jr. about his father Robert Kennedy
A decade previous to Talbot, in 1997, Tim Naftali and Aleksandr Fursenko published the fine book, One Hell of a Gamble,a study of the Missile Crisis from the Russian point of view. In that volume, the authors first wrote about William Walton’s now famous mission to Moscow in 1964. Walton was ostensibly going as a goodwill ambassador for cultural exchanges, but his real objective was to carry a message to Nikita Khrushchev from Robert and Jackie Kennedy. That message was that, although the American media had jumped on this lone gunman idea, they thought that President Kennedy had been killed by a domestic conspiracy… one that was politically motivated from the rightwing. That because of this assassination, the attempts at détente that Kennedy and Khrushchev had made would now have to be placed on hiatus. Johnson was much too pro-big business to pursue that ideal. Therefore, RFK would soon resign. When he became president, the effort at reconciliation would then continue. (Talbot, p. 12)
However, way before that book, there had been instances during Jim Garrison’s inquiry into the Kennedy assassination that indicated Robert Kennedy was quite interested in what the New Orleans DA was uncovering. In this author’s current book, Destiny Betrayed (Second Edition) I note an instance where RFK was in California staying at a friend’s house in 1968. Family friend Mort Sahl was also there. That night, Sahl had to leave for a performance. When he got back, his then wife told him that RFK peppered her with questions about what Garrison was digging up. (Sahl was working for Garrison.) Richard Lubic, a campaign worker for Bobby Kennedy in 1968 told another Garrison investigator, Bill Turner, that RFK said that if he were elected president, he would like to reopen the Warren Commission inquiry. (Talbot, p. 359) In Harold Weisberg’s original manuscript of Oswald in New Orleans, he wrote about being in contact with someone in Bobby Kennedy’s 1968 campaign. He communicated to Weisberg that RFK had real doubts about the Warren Commission. Weisberg told his contact if this were the case RFK should voice his concerns in public, making sure he would not be assassinated because of his belief. After Bobby was killed, Weisberg wrote that never was a seer less happy with the fulfillment of his prophecy.
In other words, anyone looking for evidence of this could have found it many years previous. Only in our media, especially in the MSM, could any such story be considered news. From a sociological point of view it is interesting to note two factors that figured in the reaction.
Charlie Rose has built a career out of being the alleged thinking man’s talk show host and he actually began hosting such programs on Dallas’ KXAS-TV in the seventies. He then worked for CBS News in the eighties and began the present version of his talk show on PBS in the nineties. But while doing his show he also worked for the CBS program Sixty Minutes II from 1999 until 2005. Therefore Rose was the perfect choice from the Dallas power elite point of view. All this would indicate that he is pretty much a canned establishment figure. How much of an establishment figure is he? Well, he has attended several Bilderberg Conferences of late. His second wife is the stepdaughter of CBS founder Bill Paley. It will be a cold day in Hades if one ever catches anything on his snooze fest that seriously counters the established American Conventional Wisdom. Therefore Rose was the perfect choice from the Dallas power elite point of view.
Consequently, when his guest began uttering such heresies in public, Rose automatically kicked into damage control mode. When the son mentioned that his father went into a long funk after JFK was killed, Rose (understanding his next ticket to a Bilderger Conference depended upon his stemming this tide) quickly suggested if this was because RFK felt “some guilt because he thought there might have been a link between his very agressive efforts against Organized Crime?”. This question was, of course, an attempt to simultaneously:
Rose’s response was unwarranted. There are any number, or even combination of reasons RFK may have sunk into emotional quicksand. As indicated above, he clearly understood that his brother’s large and looming foreign policy agenda would now go unfulfilled. RFK may also have come to an understanding, realizing the enormous pressure now placed upon him, to become something he was not: a political candidate. He also had to have realized that, in fact, he had no choice but to do so because his power base had now been pretty much circumscribed by President Johnson and J. Edgar Hoover. In fact, this idea was mentioned by the son when he said, “As soon as Jack died, he lost all his power.” Further, after this point, Hoover “never spoke to him again.”
But RFK Jr. then returned to this Mafia theme when he said one of the things that pricked his father’s curiosity was the phone records of Oswald and Ruby. These contained many calls to organized crime figures. Therefore, his father “was fairly convinced at the end of that there had been involvement by somebody.” Again, Rose jumped in and did his bit: “Organized crime, Cubans.” To which, RFK Jr. (thankfully) replied, “Or rogue CIA.”
Rose’s initial reaction was the first attempt to channel the story down a certain acceptable path. Rawlings’ decision not to release a recording is another. But the third is the reaction of the Dallas Morning News to it. In about one week they wrote three articles based on the interview. In these articles, dating from January 11th to the 14th, the paper consulted with their official propaganda mouthpiece Gary Mack. Mack tried to cast aspersions on the credibility of RFK Jr. by saying that there really could not be any Oswald phone calls since there is no record of him having a personal phone service. Bill Kelly quickly and effectively countered this deliberate obfuscation. (http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2013/01/oswald-and-ruby-phone-records-rfk-jr.html) One of the Morning News writers, Rodger Jones, then tried to confuse things even further by saying that, well, RFK Jr. said that Bobby’s interest first began during the Garrison inquiry. Yet, according to David Talbot, Bobby Kennedy actually started his inquiry back in 1963. This spin control ignores two things: 1.) According to Garrison volunteers, like Mort Sahl, the Attorney General clearly did have an interest in Garrison’s investigation, and 2.) Since RFK Jr. was still something of a child in 1963, it is much more likely that four years later, as an adolescent, he would more clearly recall such a matter.
In further comments, Mack said that it appears that some members of the Kennedy clan have decided to say one thing in public, “But apparently, privately, some members. . . have raised questions about areas of the assassination.” Well, from the material I have presented here, its pretty clear that the Kennedy family did have doubts from a very early date. In fact, we can go back even further, to Arthur Schlesinger’s massive biography of the Attorney General, Robert Kennedy and His Times. In that biography, published back in 1978, Schlesinger made clear that Kennedy thought the Warren Report was a subpar and unsatisfactory effort. And further that CIA Director John McCone told him that two assassins were involved in the shooting. (pgs. 643-44)
Further demonstrating how only in the MSM can the fairy tale exist that RFK and the Kennedy family abided by the Warren Commission, consider the words of Kennedy cousin Kerry McCarthy to Debra Conway in 1997. McCarthy was a speaker at Lancer’s November in Dallas conference. She told Conway that, whatever the Kennedys say in public about the JFK murder, when you visit their homes, you will see several of the JFK assassination books lining their shelves.
Chris Lawford, son of Peter Lawford and Pat Kennedy, more or less explained why this was so. In his book, Symptoms of Withdrawal, he wrote that the day after the assassination, “I woke up [and] found my father sitting at the flagpole where I used to raise the presidential flag when Uncle Jack came to visit. He was crying like a baby. Strangers held a vigil on the beach outside my parents’ house for days after the assassination.” Pat Kennedy now started drinking with a new seriousness, and the couple was divorced shortly afterwards.
It takes a long time to come to grips with that kind of pain. And who wants to deal with it in public? At this talk, Robert Jr. finally did. He also praised one of the books the clan had on their shelves, JFK and the Unspeakable by James Douglass. This is one of the few books on the case that has managed to make its way out of the JFK assassination niche. It has sold well now for four years, and there are now over 100,000 copies of it for sale in various formats, including audio book. Bobby Kennedy Jr. liked this book so much that, after he read it, he called Douglass and congratulated him on a job well done. Maybe that was the first sign of recovering from a family trauma that has lasted for well over four decades. And maybe now the MSM can wake up and say, well, if the Attorney General thought the Warren Report was shot full of holes, maybe it was. Thanks to his son for making that moment possible.
As mentioned above, the fact that this interview is not on the Internet is a disgrace. Please contact Mayor Mike Rawlings and tell him that, in the interest of democracy, history, and proper journalism, it should be posted immediately.
Phone: 214-670-4054
Fax: 214-670-0646
Address: Dallas City Hall, 1500 Marilla Street, Room 5EN, Dallas Texas, 75201
or send an email to Chris Heinbaugh, Vice President of External Affairs | AT&T Performing Arts Center
~Jim DiEugenio