"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." --William Colby, former CIA Director, quoted by Dave Mcgowan, Derailing Democracy.
DALLAS, TEXAS--Yesterday, in an event that barely got coverage today by the mainstream media, 82-year-old George Jeffries finally came forward with his footage that takes-place roughly 90 seconds before the assassination (duration is at 40 seconds-on, so it's unclear how close it extends into the first shots fired at the president).
"The president's coat is clearly if briefly seen bunched up on his back," stated Ed Stoddard's Reuters piece, which is peppered with accusations that anyone questioning the Warren Commission Report is a "conspiracy buff." The BBC was more level-headed, while AP was coy.
The film shows the president's coat bunched up on his back - a detail some will see as evidence that the bullet wounds on the president's body did not match those on his jacket. The film also shows "the clearest, best film of Jackie in the motorcade", says Mr Mack. Also visible is secret service agent Clint Hill, riding on the back of the car. (BBC, 02.20.2007)
No mafia-connections here, no intelligence operatives, and Jack Ruby's FBI, intelligence, and mafia-connections never existed either (someone should check his corpse for polonium-210, he claimed he was injected by government agents with a radioactive substance--I know, this never happens). One should consider that none of the multifarious theories of Oliver Stone's "JFK" contains one pointing towards La Cosa Nostra.
Problem: with the jacket bunched-up (an issue brought-up by researchers before), the holes in the late-president's suit-jacket simply don't match the Warren Report's version, nor the trajectories. The points of entry are too-low on the garment and the president's body.
To make a long story short, this is new evidence of major import, and once again it undermines Arlen Specter's "single-bullet theory." There have been many other pieces of evidence that have done so, but this appears to be a solid one. With the entry-wounds so low in the back, at least one shot has to come from the grassy knoll, and possibly elsewhere at ground-level.
But besides all this, Specter's behavior as a Warren Commission lawyer/investigator has been called-into-question by several JFK assassination witnesses. Jean Hill (the woman in red in the Zapruder film) saw the assassination no more than 20 feet in-front of her. Specter questioned her in Dallas on March 24, 1964, and under peculiar circumstances at Parkland Hospital:
He kept trying to get me to change my story, particularly regarding the number of shots. He said I had been told how many shots there were and I figured he was talking about what the Secret Service told me right after the assassination. His inflection and attitude was that I knew what I was supposed to be saying, why wouldn't I just say it. I asked him, 'Look, do you want the truth or just what you want me to say?' He said he wanted the truth, so I said, 'The truth is that I heard between four and six shots.'
I told him, 'I'm not going to lie for you.' So he starts talking off the record. He told me about my life, my family, and even mentioned that my marriage was in trouble. I said, 'What's the point of interviewing me if you already know everything about me?' He got angrier and finally told me, 'Look, we can even make you look as crazy as Marguerite Oswald [Lee Oswald's mother] and everybody knows how crazy she is. We could have you put in a mental institution if you don't cooperate with us.' I knew he was trying to intimidate me... (as told to researcher Jim Marrs)
In 1975, the public was finally shown the Zapruder film on national television by "Goodnight America," and the outcry from it and Watergate (and many other examples of our intelligence community running-amok) caused the creation of the committee. Neither this film, or the Zapruder film support the Warren Commission Report or Specter's theory.
We should ask ourselves what kind of political creature Senator Specter really constitutes. Consider that he dragged his feet for nearly a year after it was revealed by the New York Times on December 15, 2005 that we were (are?) all being spied-on illegally by the Bush administration via the NSA. There were no investigations of the NSA programs under Specter's House Judiciary leadership, echoing the quality of his work as a Warren Commission lawyer. We should all re-examine this man, his record, and his background thoroughly.
But, we know that the NYT covered-up knowledge of the NSA surveillance and database-program for over one-year. Granted, we know the media aren't particularly adversarial to established power--in-fact, they're the servant of it--but are there other factors? Indeed, there are.
From Carl Bernstein's 1977 Rolling Stone article on CIA-infiltration of the mainstream media:
According to sources in the Senate and the Agency, the use of journalists was one of two areas of inquiry which the CIA went to extraordinary lengths to curtail. The other was the Agency’s continuing and extensive use of academics for recruitment and information gathering purposes. In both instances, the sources said, former directors Colby and Bush and CIA special counsel Mitchell Rogovin were able to convince key members of the committee that full inquiry or even limited public disclosure of the dimensions of the activities would do irreparable damage to the nation’s intelligence‑gathering apparatus, as well as to the reputations of hundreds of individuals. (Rolling Stone, 10.12.1977)These excuses sound familiar, don't they...just like those of the current Bush administration? When you read any article on the JFK assassination, consider that much of the media is already honeycombed by the CIA.
Like the mainstream media, Arlen Specter shows a strange tendency towards anti-democratic behavior, and standing-down at crucial moments in our history when democracy is threatened from-within. What is his relationship with our intelligence community? The media? Who is Arlen Specter, and why don't we know him better?
His views on foreign policy, intelligence oversight, and protection of the Bill of Rights are a bone-of-contention with his GOP peers. Yet, he's often at-odds with the GOP on many other issues such as social spending, and even abortion. Overarching economic concerns are uncontroversial between them all. He's hardly alone in our political culture, and oddly, Joe Lieberman's career sometimes resembles Specter's. US News did an interestingly-timed piece on Specter in September of 2005, when the NSA surveillance program was about to be exposed:
After three years at a prestigious Philadelphia firm, Specter joined the Philadelphia district attorney's office in 1959 as an assistant D.A. It was while he was a prosecutor in Philadelphia, in December 1963, that he was invited by a law school friend at the Justice Department to join the staff of the Warren Commission. In that position, Specter, dogged and determined, developed the single-bullet theory to explain how a lone gunman had fired the single shot that killed President Kennedy and injured Texas Gov. John Connally, who was in the car with him. ...It is largely his inscrutable political identity that has made him such a curiosity for such a long time.(US News, 09.12.2005)
America is not immune from established history. Cowards ignore the truth and the troubling questions. According to Arlen Specter and the mainstream media, we can never trust our senses or our own judgment. To them, we the people, are incapable of independent thought. They claim the right to think for us, and have planted the seed-of-doubt about the Kennedy-assassination since November 22nd, 1963 by their actions.
Things might get messy for them and their controllers if every public school had to teach American children the fact that President Kennedy was murdered by a right-wing constellation that coalesced and struck him down for reasons that are still unknown today.