As President, will Barack Obama reopen alleged JFK coverups to help arrive at cloture after two failed investigations?
“If guilt is the question, then truth is the answer.” A famous line from the great Willie Nelson. The song, from Red Headed Stranger, goes on — “I’ve been lying to me all along.”
I wonder if, in the interests of truth, Barack Obama. as President, will encourage the answering of the following questions. Out of more of more than 600 books about the Kennedy Assassination, these are the few questions I feel, with some help from reading Gaeton Fonzi, cry out for some sort of cloture:
1. The role of the CIA. This is a virtual void and therefore a hotbed of conspiracy speculation. What we do know is that we still have no cloture on the issue of CIA involvement. In particular, the issue of whether David Atlee Phillips was Maurice Bishop needs to be determined to the satisfaction of all. Another way of putting this is: What did the CIA conceal from the Warren Commission and then the House Select Committee on Assassinations investigation? And why?
2. Sylvia Odio testimony. Fonzi regards the testimony he gathered from Sylvia Odio as the most convincing direct evidence that there was a conspiracy — that Oswald and others were involved. Is her valediction quoted by Fonzi something we can reverse at this late date? “We lost. We all lost.”
3. Single Bullet Question. Fonzi notes an indisputable evidence of conspiracy: That the location of bullet holes in the back of Kennedy’s jacket and shirt refute a single bullet theory.
One convincing validation of Fonzi’s evidential approach seems to me to be that he does not flesh out a conspiracy theory. He merely indicates that there was a conspiracy.
My own impression is that there were forces that had an interest in ridding the world of persons deemed a fundamental threat to their powerful and passionately affirmed interests. And that it mattered not who they were. I can imagine an atmosphere in which rumor, innuendo and fact led to a general assent to specific plans to achieve the decimation of JFK, RFK and MLK. And that at some point wishes turned into commands.
The assassination of Malcolm X seems to me a transparent indication of how this works. More than one were clearly and openly involved. In the case of the less transparent assassinations of JFK, RFK and MLK, the need to create an easy and satisfying story led to the involvement of patsys who participated, but not alone and not without connection to the jaws of hell world which they were serving.
The CIA was and is an entity which has essentially been legally permitted to flaunt the canons of democracy.
What is the “payoff” of believing there has been conspiracy?
It vindicates an understanding of how society works that is more true than a romantic one which gives to lone individuals the power to change everything.
My use of the phrase jaws of hell is a way of making immanent and understandable and therefore vulnerable forces which have hitherto been assumed to be beyond fathoming and likely signs of a real hell somewhere. We do not need that superstructure. We know how conflict is created and how forces coalesce and how difficult it is to achieve reason and fairness when confronted with those who will not play by civilized and just rules.
Barack Obama in PA Today
Send a Personal Email to Stephen C. Rose