Whistleblowers, CIA Transparency and Political Rhetoric

 

I know many of you have been awaiting the release of my new book, “JFK: The Untold Stories”. I still have no word, but I promise to share here first when I do. Thank you for your continued support and interest in it.

In that vein, I was reading several articles this week while recuperating from my scary hospital visit. I wanted to share a few of my own thoughts, then urge you to read a few well written articles.

The political rhetoric we see in today’s administration parallels that of the JFK administration save for they are polar opposites in regards to the men who lead/led our country. I have noticed in my research and in our daily news that propaganda is alive and well in our society. For years, naysayers against JFK would talk about his sexual exploits, his proclivity for the Hollywood scene and the glamour of Camelot. The truth is, these topics were ways to share “a little information” with us, the naive and dumb public, by the government and its mouthpiece the media. My new book has a chapter by one of the people who was privy to these actions, James Wagenvoord of Time/Life. Andrew Krieg does a much better job of describing this propaganda in his article,“Understanding Hollywood-Style Propaganda from JFK to Trump.”

Secondly, I have never understood why we have been led to believe that National Security is what protects us. Whenever I think about it, I think of the “Men in Black” movies that sarcastically make fun of these said government type entities through entertainment. As Tommy Lee Jones’s character “K” states, “A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you’ll know tomorrow.” We don’t need to imagine about the JFK Assassination. We know. Oswald was used. There was a conspiracy to keep the truth from we, the dumb, panicky, dangerous animals we are. In an article by Jacob Hornberger, he talks about why CIA murderers should be protected. Read it here.

Are you getting mad yet?

Lastly, I’m not a big supporter of unfounded, questionable witnesses, theories or flashy “researchers”. Wim Dankbaar’s James Files documentary is a setback to the JFK Research Community. Rumor has it that Files, a felon and former prisoner, made $550,000 dollars for his participation in the documentary. Beverly Oliver, the self-professed Babushka Lady, gives conference speeches claiming my grandfather’s film is hers. Judyth Vary Baker holds conferences as “the lover of Lee Oswald” with no evidentiary proof of her affair save for some letters with a name torn off (Lee has just as many letters in it as her former husband Bob), a gimme green glass that could be found in any canister of coffee distributed by Reily’s and of course her pay stub from Reily’s. I don’t believe this is proof of knowing him. How come her name isn’t mentioned in not one of the many government funded investigations as well as the thousands of amateur investigations conducted since 1963? Even Jim Garrison’s extensive investigation of her supposed friend David Ferrie in the city she lived, New Orleans, mentions nothing of her. On top of that, key and intelligent JFK researchers like Mary Ferrell, Debra Conway, David Lifton, Greg Parker, Dave Reitzes, Pamela Brown and Barb Junkkarinen and Baker’s own family have been interviewed and spent hours on her myriad of stories only to find holes and lies in her many statements. Sadly, many of my peers and friends go to her conferences to speak under the guise, “We are able to sell our books and educate her followers” a ploy I don’t agree with as it lends credence by their attendance to her questionable claims. Still and all, Ms. Baker’s conferences keep people interested in the JFK Assassination, albeit in ways that render her a profit (none of her financial records have even been seen) while sharing some truths. As Andrew Krieg writes, “Even if one discounts such personal testimonials, compelling scientific evidence suggests that Oswald could not have killed Kennedy from the rear because the fatal shot came from the president’s right front.”

We cannot allow fake reality, self-interspersion in such a horrific event, and disinformation to shape our views on the truth. We must be diligent. We must demand truth. We must dispel disinformation when and where we find it. And we must hold our government accountable to do the same.

 

No Comments Yet.

Leave a comment

You must be Logged in to post a comment.