Skip to main content
Report this ad

See also:

Warren Report turns 50 this year

tragedy multiplied by Warren Report
tragedy multiplied by Warren Report
Getty Images

Many Americans feel that "Gone With the Wind" may be the best American novel ever written. It is a great book about fictional people caught up in one of the most compelling events of our time: the Civil War. It could also be said that the Warren Report offers the same thrilling reading of fiction set against the backdrop of one of America history's most troublesome murders: the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.As 2013 was the 50th anniversary of JFK's death, this year will mark 50 years since the publication of the government's "official" account of the Kennedy assassination which took place November 22nd, 1963. Most American's grew to believe that there was more than one shooter involved in Kennedy's killing. Lee Harvey Oswald was quite quickly picked up within an hour after the shooting, and the official government story of this tragedy stuck with him as the one and only assassin. A remarkable piece of police work, or an almost preconceived set-up of circumstances which neatly fell into place? One thing is for sure, from Lyndon Johnson on down, having Lee Harvey Oswald as the one and only killer was a mandate from the powers that be: the American people must be comfortable with this premise.

There are thousands of books which have been written and various versions of what really happened that day, but I'll suggest a few which I believe tell the truth-something the Warren Commission didn't do, but in some ways could not do. The one sordid chapter in American history which was the genesis of Kennedy's murder, the plot to kill Fidel Castro, was never told to the Warren Commission. Without this one aspect of then recent history, makes the Warren Report a farce. To be brief, the Eisenhower administration helped in the overthrow of duly elected governments in the early 1950's: Iran and Guatemala were both seen then as governments "unfriendly" to the USA. That means they were considered too left, or too friendly to the Soviet Union. The overthrow of Iran's government obviously came back to haunt us in 1979. The bottom line though was that our government was engaged in the destruction or removal of other nation's governments if they were deemed too communistic or potentially too left wing. This is why when Castro took over Cuba in 1959, the Eisenhower administration placed that island nation in its cross-hairs as a place too close to the United States geographically, and too close to the Soviet Union in ideology.

None other than then Vice President, Richard Nixon was placed in the role of planner on how to expel Castro. This is when the plans began to see a "removal" the rebel leader by whatever means available. This of course included assassination. Nixon didn't have much time left to make this happen because the 1960 presidential campaign would begin soon, and he as the prospective Republican nominee needed a victory in removing Castro from power. Remember the times: we were at the height of the cold war, and we had a 'commie" government 90 miles away from our coast. Since the mafia had so much to lose in Cuba (casinos-hotels-millions-etc,..), someone had the great idea to employ various mobsters to help knock-off Castro. You would think the most powerful country the world had ever known, using the CIA, the military, and the mob, could eliminate one two-bit dictator who wasn't that far from Miami. Failed assassination attempts, poison pills, and drugs that would make Castro's beard fall off in order to humiliate him were all tried and all failed. The CIA began training very intense anti-Castro Cubans to overthrow Castro in various attacks which culminated years later with the pathetically planned and ill-conceived Bay of Pigs fiasco.

As the Kennedy's took over, Robert Kennedy was asked by his brother to get involved in these anti-Castro crusades which the brother's Kennedy became somewhat obsessed with in their desire to see succeed. They wanted Castro removed-period. Where events began to unravel was in the use of the mob which began within the Eisenhower era, and continued when the Kennedy's came into power. Whether the Kennedy's actually knew of this (mob involvement) has never been truly answered but keep in mind, Bobby Kennedy had a rack record of going after the mob, and he was quite successful at it. The mob was getting angry at the Kennedy brothers, and after the Bay of Pigs, the highly volatile Cubans who already felt betrayed by the Kennedy's for their failure to provide air power at that failed operation, were beginning to think of JFK as the real barrier in reclaiming Cuba. There were rogue elements in the CIA and the military who also felt the Kennedy's were too soft on communism and going to war in general. The often heard idea that JFK was seriously considering the removal of advisers from South Vietnam also irritated those in power who wanted that war-badly. This was the heated and inflammable climate as 1962 turned into 1963.

None of what i just wrote was ever part of the Warren Report. That's why, no matter how many volumes there are, this report is flawed from start to finish.The sad fact is, at least three members of that commission (John Sherman Cooper, Haley Boggs and Richard Russell) did not entirely agree with the findings, especially the part about Oswald being the "lone" assassin. This too was left out of the report. As the United States government sought to "comfort" any anxieties the population may have had over this history changing murder (some would say a coup), you could say our very government was, in fact, partaking in a cover-up. It all sounds far-fetched, but read the real history of these events in some recent books and you may reconsider what our government (& various hack writers) have been trying to force-feed a usually complacent public. The Hidden History of the JFK Assassination by Lamar Waldron. Who Really Killed Kennedy by Jerome R. Corsi. Those are just two recently published books, but there are many more.

Think about Ruby killing Oswald. Even Robert Kennedy, when he saw the phone records of Jack Ruby after the assassination remarked that they looked the same as his witness list from his days on the rackets committee (investigating mob affairs and crimes plus their infiltration into labor unions). Books from people like Bill O'Reilly are a joke. For whatever reason, the extreme right always likes to dismiss people who disagree with the official government report as "conspiracy nuts", like they can be placed alongside the freaks who think 9/11 was a plot by the American government. In another interesting book I just started, Dallas 1963, by Bill Minutaglio and Steven L. Davis, include a very relevant remark from a speech JFK was scheduled to deliver the day he was killed: "America's leadership must be guided by the lights of learning, and reason or else those who confuse rhetoric with reality and the plausible with the possible will gain the popular ascendancy with their seemingly swift and simple solutions to every world problem". This is why Kennedy was and is so missed. His ability to speak the truth in a way few presidents have since his departure. This one brief statement encapsulates so much of right-wing rhetoric which engulfed Dallas in the early 1960's and permeates through the polarized political air of Fox News and all right-wing media. They simply ignore the facts, and offer simple solutions (cut taxes-end regulations) to complex problems. This is why that element in America has gained so much popularity. The masses can be like sheep who like being led because it's easier that seeking the truth. The truth can be ugly and difficult to understand, but as Americans-we can handle it, and should never tolerate the lies from government spread in order to keep us in line.Before our generation fades into history-we should set this mind-blowing crime of our time correctly as it was-not the way it was spelled out.That's the least we can do for future generations.

Report this ad