Did Johnson Kill Kennedy?

Submitted by Pachamama
John Fitzgerald Kennedy (JFK) was assassinated in Dallas, USA on November 22nd 1963

John Fitzgerald Kennedy (JFK) was assassinated in Dallas, USA on November 22nd 1963

For, in the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children’s future. And we are all mortal.” – JFK

Everybody seems to remember a gloomy day on November 22nd 1963 when a volley of bullets rang out in Dallas killing John Fitzgerald Kennedy (JFK), POTUS, and injuring Texas governor Connolly. Despite 50 years of propaganda by the conspirators to cover up the murder of the most powerful man in the world, the truth has emerged. In the last 50 years 2000 books have been written about these events, dozens of movies, many more documentaries, hundreds of unofficial investigations and several official investigations. Some of these official investigations were indeed conducted or controlled by the very people who were part of the criminal conspiracy, to as they said, ‘rid the world of Communism’.

As part of the basic conspiracy related persons and possible witnesses were killed, including one JFK’s lovers. More importantly, there was a larger conspiracy by government agencies to kill Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK), Robert F. Kennedy (RFK), the US Attorney General in 1963 and brother of the slain JFK and the FBI supported program called “Cointelpro’’ to prevent the rise of a Black messianic figure in the USA. Of course, there were other security operations like ‘zipper’ and so on. We will argue that there are many critical links between, among and within the forces that committed the murder of JFK.  It is now clear that a coalition of forces within the FBI, the CIA, Naval Intelligence and the Pentagon not only killed JFK, but more importantly, had the means, opportunity and motives to kill and cover up this assassination. These events have changed the very nature of the US Presidency and government from a democracy to the variant of oligarchy and fascism which we have today.

By 1963 JFK, who came to office nearly three years earlier as a hawkish Democrat, had been guided into The Bay of Pigs debacle in Cuba, the Vietnam War, the Cuban Missile Crisis and more hostile diplomatic relations with USSR’s President Sergeyevich Khrushchev at the height of the Cold War. Also by 1963, JFK had come to see the futility of the Cold War and had opened back-channels with Khrushchev to end it, rid the earth of ALL nuclear weapons and engage in normal relations with the USSR. The belligerent hawks, like General Curtis Lemay, within the military-industrial-security apparatus, the FBI, the CIA, naval intelligence etc accused JFK of being a Commie and recruited a gangster, Lyndon Baines Johnson (LBJ), Vice-President at the time, to be part of this criminal conspiracy to subvert an elected government and assassinate JFK. Our revered Malcolm X, at the time, deemed it as ‘chickens coming home to roost’.

What do we know about LBJ? Let’s get what people say are the good things out of the way first. It is said that he shepherd the Civil Rights legislation through Congress. That he showed a higher level of commitment than JFK to civil rights issues. That he was more amenable to working with Black people, etc. The first mistake JFK made was to, in a perfunctory manner, offered the vice-presidency slot to LBJ. This is oftentimes done in the American political system, as a mere gesture to powerful contenders, but it generally expected that these offers are to be declined as players have a ‘keen’ sense of who the real VP nominee is to be, all this as part of the political shenanigans – not LBJ! He had worked hard to put himself into contention at the DNC conference and felt he was more deserving of the presidency that the son of a former bootlegger, Irish Mafia figure and supporter of the Third Reich.

LBJ was also known to be an uncouth fellow who would fart hard in public, was long associated with a known killer Malcolm or Max Wallace who did his wet work, he was known to have a deep resentment for JFK. Wallace was thought to have killed more than eight people for LBJ. LBJ and RFK as attorney general never got along well. One of his mistresses, from whom he fathered a child, Madeline Brown, said he was a drunkard, an animal, admitted that LBJ told her about the planning of the JFK assassination, that it was a two year plan, that he impregnated another intern and made one of his aides, Jack Vallini marry her. LBJ was from Texas and would have known political environment and being a power former legislator and vice president had the ability to influence the facts on the ground that dreadful day in 1963. Most importantly, all the major initiatives embarked upon by JFK were immediately reversed by LBJ. For example, involvement in Indo-China, the Vietnam War was escalated in contrast to the de-escalation JFK was talking about thereby swelling the coffers of the arms manufacturers for whom JKF’s new found peaceful intent represented a strategic threat. Volume could be written indicting LBJ for being the front man in the murder of JFK.

What of the other conspirators? Let’s talk about FBI director Edgar Hoover. We know he keep files on all US officials as a lever to get them to comply with his wishes. By this time he had amassed vast powers within the bureaucracy. Hoover, a gay man, had a longtime live-in relationship with his chief deputy within the FBI. Some reports say that Hoover had videos of JFK engaging in sexual relations with women other than his wife. It is said he once showed these pictures to RFK to influence a decision. Both LBJ and Hoover were known to have ‘acquaintances’ with mafia figures. It is also reported that the major Mafia don, Trafficante had pictures of Hoover having homosexual relations. It was the same Hoover who, up to 1963, was still denying that any knowledge about the existence of the Mafia. These are the informal and formal relationships that existed amongst leading figure at the time. Relationships that were necessary conditions to get away with the murder and cover-up of the most powerful man in the world.

What about the nonsense of the lone gunman theory, that the patsy Lee Harvey Oswald killed Kennedy. The lone gunman theory is essential to deflecting blame from the real killers. It reappears time and time again in the assassinations of RFK, King and other civil rights leaders during this time period. This theory could only make sense when the death of JFK is opportunistically removed from the larger national, international, geo-political context. It could only make sense if one does now know that the trigger men, and there were three, included LBJ’s wet work man Malcolm (Max) Wallace and an American Indian by the name of Loy Factor. This theory, and it is all it has been and still is, only makes sense if we ignore that Jack Ruby, the killer of Oswald, was a Mafioso figure with strong connections to the mob and was at high levels planning meeting. Meetings attended by high government officials prior to Kennedy’s death. This only makes sense when you ignore the charges of five people who claim that LBJ admitted to his involvement in the assassination of JFK. This could only make sense when we ignore the mountain of forensic evidence pointing at a massive government conspiracy before, during and after JFK’ death  that modern investigative tools are presenting.

Whenever there is a crime the police try to determine three critical ingredient – motive, opportunity and means. In our brief overview of the most notorious murder of the 20th Century we have, on the personal level located LBJ as the one man having a motive, the opportunity and the means to kill JFK. More fundamentally we have indicted the organs of the federal and state governments of the USA as having planned, executed and most importantly covering up the murder of JFK. We have connected the murder of JFK to that of RFK to that of MLK and indeed Malcolm X. We have painted a tapestry of criminality at the center of the American government that ended in a series of high profile murders. Murders which have fundamentally changed the character of American democracy, if one has determined that it what it was. Fifty years since these killings it must not be a time for the sanctification of victimhood but a time to indict the people and governmental apparatus which have irretrievably changed the world.

65 comments

  • Was shocked to hear current Secretary of State admit on CBS last week that he does not believe the Lee Oswald story.

    Like

  • The usual goobledegook.JFK was taken out because he was moving to control the Federal Reserve Board and was not the first US President to suffer the same fate for the same attempt.The FRB remains in powerful private hands to this day.

    Like

  • As much as Pacha has, as ever, worked hard on this, I prefer the analysis in Kevin Costner’s ‘JFK’. (The “Killing Kennedy’ of the other night I thought was a drag.) Of course, conspiracy theories are typically associated with paranoia – but then, as they say, ‘you may be paranoid but they may still be out to get you’.

    I didn’t realize that anyone still accepted the ‘lone killer’ theory.

    On farting loudly in public – I’m not sure that isn’t a virtue. I had a dear priest friend who would do it and invariably quip ‘better out than in’. And another – a Baptist minister with an anti-Anglican streak – who would say “Every little helps as the vicar’s wife said as she piddled in the sea.’

    On the Missile Crisis – I remember everyone thought WW3 was about to begin. Kennedy was tough all right as he should have been after the Bay of Pigs. And yes, his toughness opened up the meaningful possibility of détente. Pity about the philandering though. I suppose it’s the strain of high office when you live 24/7 on the edge and, besides, it makes great men so much more human. I wonder about Obama. Does he live on the edge and, if so, the edge of what?

    Like

  • Violence is as American as Cherry Pie (H Rap Brown). It’s hard to believe that one man could bring down the President of the USA but Gerry Ford was lucky to survive Squeaky Fromme and Sara Jane Moore just 17 days later. Reagan barely survived John Hinckley’s bullets, which arm of Gov’t were those three from how come they can’t be packaged into this yarn?

    All these conspirators and given Americans’ penchant for celebrity and money not one conspirator was able to capitalise on it by penning a “tell all” book with movie deal and bask in glory.

    Too many people to keep this “conspiracy” a secret for so long, a secret between three people only remains a secret if two are dead.

    Like

  • @David
    To us there is no ‘question’ that Johnson headed a conspiracy that involved the Mafia, the CIA, the FBI, Anti-Castro Cubans, the military industrial complex and others to kill Kennedy. We have no question about that!

    We can say so now and indeed anybody can make a comment to that effect but when David pretends to be some kind of an editor and continuously tries to moderate this writer’s opinions as mimicking the Nation and other mainstream outlets as though he has some editorial responsibility represents what is wrong with Barbados and the Caribbean.

    Anybody with a bunch of keys all of a sudden feels a misplaced sense of authority. In the case where we argued that “Lyndon Baines Johnson killed JFK’ both men are dead, worse has been said elsewhere on the net and there is no case for any violation of the hideous libel or slander laws of any country.

    We have read more than 60 of the books written on this subject, viewed most of the films, watched most of the documentaries, studied archival material, seen most of the 8 live recording from November 22 1963, studied this as a pivotal moment in world history for more than 20 years and most importantly reviewed new evidences as presented by new digital technologies from a new generation of rigorous researchers. Given these circumstances, this article could not have taken more than 45 minutes, with breaks. We never write anything that take for than 30 to 45 minutes. This is not a paying job.

    Then you have a rass soul man called David who pretends that he is a fit and proper person to moderate our opinions, and that is what it is, to say something we never intended. We intended to say that Jonhson Killed Kennedy! Plain and simple. In this we are not on the fringe most of the serious people investigating these events agree, unless you are still watching mainstream media and the history channels.

    Like

  • Pacha

    EVERYTHING you write is forceful, nuanced and stimulating and, though I think David can be a little interfering and even slippery, I don’t think he meant to be here. Sorry – I must stop being public defender.

    On the subject of whom, what does the Bill O’R book say about it? I haven’t read it (any more than the Jesus book)

    Like

  • “We have read more than 60 of the books written on this subject, viewed most of the films, watched most of the documentaries, studied archival material, seen most of the 8 live recording from November 22 1963, studied this as a pivotal moment in world history for more than 20 years……”

    Pity you can’t find something better to do with your time.Kennedy’s dead and he isn’t coming back.

    Like

  • peltdown

    You are such a sensitive fella.

    Like

  • I suppose this means we can now forget the past. But then perhaps we should……but not the little riddles of time.

    Like

  • There was bio that clearly pointed out every successful assassination in the US found J.Edgar Hoover at the races that day and at that particular time, without fail, of course him an Johnson were joined at the hip seeing Hoover had all those juicy tapes on each and everyone of them and no one knew where he did the tapes.

    Like

  • should read: no one knew where he hid the tapes.

    Like

  • Well WEll probably where he was sticking everything else

    Like

  • Gabriel made an excellent point regarding the Fed as JFK was in the process of having the Treasury issue $4 Bn+ directly. Historically, any President that has attempted to bypass the Banks has been shot ie Lincoln and JFK OR shot at and missed like Andrew Jackson. Indeed, Jackson’s Re-election slogan was “Vote for Jackson, NOT the Banks.”

    JFK was eliminated for a variety of reasons some even with validity. Allegedly he had associations with an East German woman who he actually brought into the WH and naturally she was a Secret Agent. He was very vulnerable in this respect and therefore a National Security Risk. He pissed off many groups (short list):
    1 the Steel Industry
    2 the military industrial complex, especially by not wanting to escalate Vietnam
    3 the Chicago Mafia who his father had cut a deal with that made ALL the difference in the 1960 Election versus Nixon, after Bobby went after the M with gusto.
    4 Cuba and Castro
    5 the Russians

    LBJ was obviously the guy the “powers that be” would co-op in any plan to replace the Pres! Once he is agreeable it makes the transition very lubricated. Did LBJ initiate the process or did the cabal come to him and say that JFK is history, are you game or not?

    Like

  • To us there is no ‘question’ that Johnson headed a conspiracy that involved the Mafia, the CIA, the FBI, Anti-Castro Cubans, the military industrial complex and others to kill Kennedy. We have no question about that
    ****************
    I guess that settles it once and for all the usual suspects all in a row I wonder how many people were involved. Those “anti castro cubans” were some ungrateful SOBs after what he tried to do for them at Invasión de Bahía de Cochinos and those Mafiosos were upset that he was diddling Judith Exner (Sam Giancana’s mistress) plus brother Bobby was cracking down on them and they were also upset that that Bay of Pigs thing failed as they wanted to get back into Cuba which had been a profitable playground for them and the MIC? Perhaps they wanted to double down in Vietnam and they wanted to ensure that Robert McNamara former head of Ford remained Secretary of Defence (What’s good for GM/Ford is good for America) . As for Johnson he was a man with a plan, steals the 1948 Texas Senatorial Election ensures he is in the right place to waltz into the Vice Presidency but not without repeating his 1948 shenanigans in the 1960 Presidential Election and he convinced JFK to abandon the bubbletop on the Lincoln on that fateful day……Oh I forgot Onassis got to be involved somehow he was richer than anybody else and he had the hots for Jackie and what Ari wants Ari gets…..

    Just feeding the conspiracy machine……

    Like

  • Lawson…………i understand J. Edgar was a cross-dresser until the day they found him on the floor of his bedroom stiff and croaked……you may very well be right.

    Like

  • @WW
    Hoover was a serious BULLA!

    Like

  • @MB

    And how is this relevant?

    Just asking!

    Like

  • @David
    Especially in those days it would have made him vulnerable to BLACKMAIL as in YOU will go along with this plan OR!!!

    I was busy and did not finish, my fault. MB

    Like

  • @MB

    Understand but it would have been a bold person to attempt such a thing.

    Like

  • Moneybrain…….Hoover had a seriously split personality, but when it came to blackmailing and knowing everyone’s dirty secrets and also manipulating situations to make sure he utilized the information to his own benefit, there never was or never will be a more dangerous animal than Hoover.

    Like

  • @WW and David
    No doubt Hoover was a Master of subterfuge BUT those high ups eg LBJ et al who knew his weakness, would have kept that knowledge to themselves until they REALLY needed to use it, precisely because they knew the wicked animal they were dealing with.

    Like

  • Looka Jack…hear muh Jack……wanna talking conspiracy theory and ent know one mudda whats went on…..I hear the Rossicutions bump ee and that Lee Harold Oswald jack was just a pawn jack…..but you all ent hear the best jack…… I alos hear Obama ascension was planned by D illunimat jack or some shoite so jack…in order to facilitate this so called global recession jack….to mekk it look like a black man cant run nah cunt-try jack..imagine dat jack…murda…jack..murda I say

    Like

  • Money……Hoover also had LBJ balls in a vice grip, remember LBJ’s wife had some really, really nasty secrets therefore LBJ was Hoover’s bitch, had to continually do his bidding or else. HA!!! lol

    Like

  • St George's Dragon

    “Did LBJ kill JFK?” – in a word, no. Conspiracy theories are interesting and attractive but they are seldom correct.
    With respect to O’Reilly and “The Killing of Jesus”, if you are a firm believer in Christianity, read it, you will like it. It’s a gentle retelling of the story of the Bible with a fair amount of historical fact added. As a non-believer, I found it completely lacking in critical analysis about the history of Jesus.
    The book to read is “Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth” by Reza Aslan. He was the guy whose video went viral when Fox News interviewed him and could not understand how a Muslim could write a book about Jesus. The fact that he is a religious scholar did not seem to make an impression. Aslan makes a good job of separating the facts about the real Jewish Jesus from the later Christian overlay.

    Like

  • St George

    Thanks for that. Mind, I can see why Fox might get uptight, but for no good reason. The distinction between the ‘real’ Jesus and the ” later Christian overlay” is, at the least since the Jesus Seminar, an old trail….so whether Aslan is a Moslem is irrelevant. Besides, we are all ‘people of the Book’.

    Like

  • Isn’t it interesting that Ambassador Kennedy presented her credentials to those in Hiroshima land this week?

    Like

  • i see on the TV again around now the anniversary of JFK shooting.
    when was that again 1963 . i was 2 years old.many movies and Minny movies
    about the subject.who shot JFK. OK here it is ……..did the bullet or bullets match Oswell gun???????????
    yes or no. plain and simple.people suggest the bullets and gun could have been tampered with and so on and so forth,on and on ,
    Have we forgotten that Kennedy slept around on his wife?
    was it marlin Monroe boy friend?
    or some other woman’s husband?
    born rich.Kennedy was also for the rights of blacks and minorities to vote or whatever!!!!!
    do you think the white billionaires at the time would like that?????????
    Kennedy was assassinated because he was a spoil rich boy whose speeches written for him were moving when he addressed the nation and the world with practiced speeches meant to make the masses swoon and love him..
    did we really know him a womanizing rich boy who never had to really work a day in his life.
    it was all a game then and it is a bigger game now.
    the news networks let the people know where Obama vacations.
    does that make sense???????really ?all that kind of information should be kept quiet as we dont want a sniper with these high powered and much more
    technology, distance and accuracy , for god sake even drones.
    could easily take any one out if they know where you are going to be.
    with satellites than beam on anyone from the skies.so
    HERE IS MY ANSWER -HE WAS An ASS TO DRIVE AROUND IN A CONVERTIBLE VEHICLE WHEN HE KNEW HE WAS STEPPING ON THE BIG MEN FEET. hence bang bang he dead.what is the big surprise??????????????????????????

    Like

  • “Just feeding the conspiracy machine”
    Lest we forget, America thrives on conspiracies. Conspiracy theories sell books and newspapers.JFK and RFK went after MARTIN LUTHER KING JUNIOR AS WELL.
    this attempt by bloggers to deify JFK in office for less than 3 years mirrors the attempt to deify Mr Thompson. JFK voted against the 1957 Civil Rights act when he was a Senator and after he became President was opposed to the 1963 march on Washington by Dr king that was organized by A .Philip Randolph who was a black Republican. President Kennedy had Dr King wiretapped and investigated by the FBI on suspicion of being a communist in order to undermine Dr King. Kennedy escalated the Vietnam war and backed out of the Bay of Pigs invasion at the last moment causing many of the invaders to be killed or captured. History would record that Mr Kennedy had no legacy as President of America other than charisma and good looks and the peace corps and his association with Marilyn Monroe..
    History would record that the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights bill was passed under President Johnson with majority of the support coming from the Republicans. In my view, his “Great Society” programs did much to destroy black families and weald black communities into dependence on the Government with disastrous consequences for black upliftment and enlightenment up to now. Yes, President Johnson like all leaders would have had his faults but to diminish his achievements is nothing short of disingenuous

    Like

  • Ooohhh!!! boyyyy!!!

    Another Pachamama conspiricy theory.

    But who the hell cares whether or not Johnson killed Kennedy anyhow. Even if Kennedy had lived he would still be dead [by now].

    Like

  • Here is an excerpt from one of JFK’s speeches:

    “Deep in America, because your skin is dark, you cannot eat lunch in a restaurant open to the public. If he cannot send his children to the best public school available, if he cannot vote for the public officials who represent him, if, in short, he cannot enjoy the full and free life which all of us want than – then who among us can be content to have the color of his skin changed and stand in his place? Who among us would then be content with the counsels of patience and delay?”
    ****
    The FBI was keeping tabs on MLK long before JFK and the authorization for wire taps was done at Hoover’s request (remember that Hoover was a trusted public servant at that time). Kennedy wasn’t around long enough to have a measurable impact on Civil Rights but his Justice Dept under RFK sent Federal Marshalls to Alabama to integrate the University of Alabama which was one of the pivotal moments of the Civil Rights struggle.
    The Civil rights leaders at the time thought of Kennedy as a friend and I don’t think LBJ proposes the Civil Rights Bill and Voting Rights Act if Kennedy didn’t pave the way.

    BTW JFK was deified long before the advent of bloggers, what blogger came up with Camelot?

    Like

  • And who killed Pele?

    Like

  • Balance said that Kennedy had no legacy other than charisma and good looks. I agree with him in a sense. Yet ‘history’ and memory play little tricks and for many he will always be the young Lochinvar who represented all that was good and fine and noble. It’s kind of reflected in the old question ‘Where were you when Kennedy was shot?’. Many on here will remember, as I do. In any event, it surely IS the case that ‘looks’ are deemed to fit you for a part. Couple that with a good speaking voice and apparent sincerity of expression and you’re home. And consider Obama.

    Like

  • Reblogged this on United States Hypocrisy and commented:
    While I don’t believe that President Lyndon Baines Johnson was necessarily the man calling the shots behind the plot to kill Kennedy, I think he almost certainly had foreknowledge that it was going to occur. Johnson, after all, was the war mongers’ choice for President, seeing him as more in line with the military’s ambitions for worldwide Imperial supremacy.

    Here’s an excerpt from an informative article posted on Barbados Underground: “…by 1963, JFK had come to see the futility of the Cold War and had opened back-channels with Khrushchev to end it, rid the earth of ALL nuclear weapons and engage in normal relations with the USSR. The belligerent hawks, like General Curtis Lemay, within the military-industrial-security apparatus, the FBI, the CIA, naval intelligence etc accused JFK of being a Commie and recruited a gangster, Lyndon Baines Johnson (LBJ), Vice-President at the time, to be part of this criminal conspiracy to subvert an elected government and assassinate JFK. Our revered Malcolm X, at the time, deemed it as ‘chickens coming home to roost’.

    Like

  • Pingback: Did Johnson Kill Kennedy? « United States Hypocrisy

  • Mr Sargeant I can see from your comments you were an admirer of President Kennedy but flowery speeches written by Pierre Salinger and other speechwriters to captivate the mindless proletariat mob pale into insignificance in the face of action.
    History and not speculation will record that President Kennedy was not automatically associated with civil rights issues and his popularity is more derived from a mythical view that he stood down the Russians and President Kruschev in the Cuban missile Crisis. NO obvious civil rights legislation was signed by Mr Kennedy. Mr Kennedy put political realism before his beliefs when he voted against President Eisenhower’s 1957 Civil Rights Act. Opposition to the bill helped President Kennedy to fulfil his father’s aspirations of him becoming the Democratic presidential candidate in 1960. To be fair though Sargeant, in his campaign speeches, recognising that the black vote was crucial to his chances of gaining the Presidency, he did speak out for civil rights and his call of sympathy to Martin Luther King’s wife when he was in prison obviously and sensibly orchestrated.was well publicised by Democrats. It is instructive though that regardless of his flowery campaign speeches, it is reported that in 1961 Kennedy did nothing to help or push forward the civil rights issue . That was done after his assassination by the President of whom it is said ‘farted’ loud and hard in public like I do. For a man who claimed that poor housing could be ended with the signing of the President’s name. Mr Kennedy did nothing and the status quo remains the same up to this day. His department of urban affairs bill was rejected by his Congress and eventually according to information only a weak housing act was passed.

    Like

  • “The Civil rights leaders at the time thought of Kennedy as a friend and I don’t think LBJ proposes the Civil Rights Bill and Voting Rights Act if Kennedy didn’t pave the way.”
    Try not to distort history any further. The Civil Rights Act of 1957 was introduced in Eisenhower’s presidency and was the act that initiated the civil rights legislative program that was to include the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act. AS a Senator, Mr Kennedy opposed the Act.
    We have a tendency because we admire or like a person or celebrity to ascribe all sorts of accolades to such persons which they do not deserve on merit.

    Like

  • instead of the Blp yardfowls getting here and decrying the gains that John F kennedy made in help building a better america during his short term as President , you would do yourself a great favour to read many of his speeches and get a realistic prospective as to his hopes and dreams for an america where good triumph over evil . ..unfortunately he was prematurely killed at the hands of a mad gunman and was unable to fulfill many of his hopes and dream for a better america .however those who took up his mantle took the nuggets from his many speeches and pressed forward in the way john F kenndey had intended yes the civil rights movement was given legs because John F kennedy took noticed and confront the wrongs that were being done, those who followed in his footsteps brought civil rights to Reality because of him….John F KENNEDY even dead still delivers not by what he did do but his ideas and philosphies have been a guiding light by which many leaders have adopted and the building blocks whereby many countries today stands on,He was a true Stalwart of his time a VISIONARY., Some thing that is sorely lacking today in leadership,

    Like

  • JFK is regarded as a visionary because of his work on civil rights front? Perhaps the overflow of events preceeding had signaled that it was inevitable that Blacks could not continue to be treated like dogs and it did not matter who was in office. There is some parallel to the Mother country dumping many of the colonies, including Barbados, in the 60s.

    Like

  • Hey Balance
    I’m not trying to distort history, I wrote that the Civil Rights leaders of the time thought of Kennedy as a friend but I also wrote that he was not around long enough to have a meaningful impact on Civil Rights but symbolic acts are also important and sets the tone for what followed so when Katzenbach went to confront Wallace at the University of Alabama to integrate the University wasn’t that symbolic enough? So what if Eisenhower introduced a bill? Why did it languish for seven years? Kennedy was seen as a progressive and he provided the impetus for Johnson to proceed with the Bill.

    The struggle for Civil Rights is ongoing and Bill or no Bill it continues so when Jackie Robinson went to the Major Leagues that was a step in that direction when Trueman integrated the Armed Services that was another step when the Thurgood Marshall won in the Supreme Court in Brown vs the Board of Education that was another victory so Eisenhower is not in the vanguard.

    I’m not an admirer of any politician they all have their agendas but isn’t flowery speeches part of the game? Reagan was a trained actor but was given accolades as the “Great Communicator” so if you are a wooden speaker you better stay in the backrooms.

    BTW you seem to be an admirer of Republicans why did JC Watts who was senior to Boehner in the caucus leave? Please don’t give the “official” reasons.

    Like

  • We have a tendency because we admire or like a person or celebrity to ascribe all sorts of accolades to such persons which they do not deserve on merit.

    AC THIS IS MY RESPONSE TO YOUR UNINFORMED COMMENT.

    Like

  • “JFK is regarded as a visionary because of his work on civil rights front?”
    is this a statement or question for if it is a statement it is not entirely accurate.In the cause of civil rights Kennedy concentrated on mundane issues like putting pressure on government organisations to employ more black people..in terms of voter registration, the kennedy administration did nothing in its first year in office..in the violence in Albany in 1961, he did nothing.as he believed the violence was encouraged by the SNCCwho were referred to as “sons of bithches” by the President.Kennedy ‘s hand was forced by the James Meredith issue in 1962 and as a result he became voluntarily active.

    Like

  • JC Watts who was senior to Boehner in the caucus leave? Please don’t give the “official” reasons
    SUrely notan admirer of the Democrats which is the acknowledged party of slavery and under whose administrations the worst atrocities against black people in America were committed.
    I do not know whyJ.C Watts left you can share your information with me as i am with you but perhaps he left because his republican colleagues did not see him in the same light the as obama was seen by his democratic colleagues ‘ an acceptable looking person not entirely black but wll do. lest you forget, for three weeksin january,2008, the Clintons and their backers did their best to polarize non-black Democrat voters against Mr Obama , bringing up obama’s admitted past drug use and firing off one-liners like like LyndonJohnson” “fairy tale’ “spade work” to increasing choruses of anger from Liberals and Conservatives alike.Perhaps Mr wattslef because he would not have been able to stand his type oftreatment.

    Like

  • To u balance those that have eyes to see let them see .Your eyes are still closed to the idealogies/and the philosphy of aVISIONARY LEADER like JFK who was far advance in his yearsand was not limited and held back to pursue his dreams and aspirations for a better world. You can only see negative . Your contrite controversial comments speak volumes to your inabiltyto connect and understood the language of this once to become a great leader that even in death he speaks.

    Like

  • What some peeps pun here fail to grasp is that a good leader knows when to proceed with Transformative Strategy.In several respects this may have cost JFK his life. You must know who you can pick fights with.

    BO came into power promising many things, he may have genuinely intended to accomplish, but quickly realised that he might be well advised to delay action on those areas that may anger crazy actors with power.

    Like

  • @ Caleb
    Caleb, where is the evidence that point to the fact that President Johnson had had a foreknowledge that Kennedy’s assassination was imminent? (Lip service)
    Now, I have read the Warren commission Report on the Kennedy assassination. And I have also followed subsequent documentaries and updates regarding this murder during the years. And I haven’t as of yet heard such utter nonsense.

    To be quite frank Caleb, and you can research this if you do not trust my judgment; no way in that report did it in anyway implicated President Johnson as having a foreknowledge of your ridiculous claim. (Lip Service)
    This is a new revelation to me. Because for as long as I have been following the Kennedy assassination. I have never heard of such claim. Unless, you have information at your disposal that I’m not cognizant of, but then again, I doubt it. I am infatuated with this story and doubt if such information had ever escaped my grasped.

    At any rate, what I had gathered from the report is this: and I had read this report some thirty years ago. The report clearly pointes to Lee Harvey Oswald, Mafia boss Sam Giancana, Jack Ruby, Fidel Castro, and the Soviet Kgb as the major players behind Kennedy’s assassination. Now, I am not saying that I believe everything that I read, but this evidence surely seems convincing to me. Of course, one has to put all of the historical facts in their proper perspective to arrive at such a conclusion.

    So this claim of President Johnson foreknowledge of Kennedy’s assassination is ridiculous and ought to be repudiated at all cost. Because it’s an affront to character of this championed of the civil – rights and civil liberties.

    Like

  • Thanks for the links! I’m surprised John Kerry would admit as such, seeing as how these days he’s become one of the lead U.S. war-mongers. Very interesting.

    Like

  • Caleb, you ought to get your hands on a copy of the Warren Report on the Kennedy’s Assassination. And I confident that it’s going to enlarge your understand of many of the facts, surrounding this man’s murder. Now, I not saying that this report it is final authority on the Kennedy’s Assassination, but it surely enhanced my understanding of the case in many respects. The movie has shed some light on the case, but not in the way in which the book has done.

    Like

  • Caleb, you ought to know that forever good that comes into the world. There is obviously a corresponding evil. Now no one is claiming that America is totally honest, with respect to here foreign policy in the world. Only a person who is operating on a minimum amount of brainpower would assume such as position. But, know, it is funny how the rest of the world continues to look at America as the symbol of moral correctness. When the reality is, she has her faults and failings like another nation in the world.

    Like

  • @Mark Fenty In case you haven’t noticed, I did not mention anywhere that the Warren Commission implicated Johnson as a suspect. Of course it would not! He appointed the people to the commission. And who did he appoint to as the head of the Warren Commission? That would be none other than former CIA director Allen Dulles. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that this is the very same Allen Dulles who was responsible for intentionally misleading the newly elected president Kennedy about the Bay of Pigs Operation in 1961 — in effect trying to force him into war with Revolutionary Cuba. He was subsequently relieved of his post as head of the CIA for this act of insubordination after serving as director for almost nine years. Dulles had an axe to grind when it came to the Kennedy brothers. This is very well-documented. So why is it that he was the first person that Johnson ran to when it came to discovering who was responsible for the death of a president Dulles begrudged?

    Furthermore, Lyndon Johnson was very two-faced when it came to Civil Rights issues. He believed in and worked to get some monumental Civil Rights legislation passed in his term, but he also signed off on and refused to rein in FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover’s malicious war against Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X, and other human rights activists. And he signed off on Hoover’s wire-tapping.

    http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/98apr/lbj.htm :
    “Though Johnson in principle disliked taping and wiretaps, he secretly taped more than 7,500 of his own telephone conversations as President. Moreover, during the 1964 campaign, after a visit to the White House, Richard Russell wrote, “Hoover has apparently been turned loose and is tapping everything…. [Johnson] stated it took him hours each night to read them all (but he loves this).” ”

    So much for “civil liberties”. (lip service) (-:
    And what was done in Vietnam, although Kennedy certainly does share a certain portion of the blame for U.S. involvement over there as do Truman and Eisenhower, cannot be eradicated from Johnson’s record no matter how much you may wish to overlook it. Following the inauguration of President Lyndon B. Johnson to his own elected term in 1964, the nation’s war efforts in Vietnam increased dramatically. At the time of President John F. Kennedy’s assassination in late 1963, about 12,000 military personnel were stationed in Vietnam. By early 1968, after four years of the Johnson Administration, that number had increased to more than 500,000 combat troops fighting on the ground in one of the most horrific and violent wars the world has ever known. This horrible travesty would eventually take the lives of nearly 60,000 Americans and an astounding 1,000,000 Vietnamese.
    http://ushypocrisy.com/2013/01/09/the-king-that-was-and-the-king-that-wasnt-martin-luther-king-jr-vs-capitalism-militarism-and-racism-then-and-now-part-1-of-3/

    Like

  • .”Your eyes are still closed to the idealogies/and the philosphy of aVISIONARY LEADER like JFK who was far advance in his yearsand was not limited and held back to pursue his dreams and aspirations for a better world. ”

    My eyes might be closed but I am not blind like you to the reality that truth counts and not fiction. If you want to hold Mr Kennedy on a pedestal of nothingness, that is your prerogative.

    Like

  • To define Mr Kennedy as ” a pedestal of nothingness is : complete balderdash, here is a President who had a vision of putting men on the moon .yet you define john f kennedy as a pedestal of ,nothingness. do you not realise that most of the advances we have in technology was a result of such boldness vision and foresight , you can;t be possibly be so out of touch not to understand the importance of such an undertaking at a time when technology was in its formative years. or would you prefer out of ignorance to be contrite and adversarial in your comments towards a president who in his short term did achieved what others might have seen as sheer madness , Maybe you should take a look right in our back yard and reflect upon those who have brought this little island almost to a ‘State of nothingness:” while putting those in charge on a pedestal . there is where YOU would find the true meaning ..

    Like

  • Balance
    SUrely notan admirer of the Democrats which is the acknowledged party of slavery and under whose administrations the worst atrocities against black people in America were committed
    *******
    If you are laying atrocities against Black people in America at the feet of the Democrats surely you must feel the same for the actions of the Brits, French, Spanish, Dutch, and Belgians et al who enslaved and colonialized our people (and others) all over the world. If Democrats were the party of Slavery today’s Republicans are the party of States rights.

    The Slaves were freed circa 1861 fast forward to 1948 (which presumably is in your lifetime), the Democrats introduced a Civil Rights agenda at their Presidential convention which immediately caused white Southern delegates (led by Strom Thurmond who later became a staunch Republican)) to flee the party. Thurmond contested the Presidential Election as a third Party candidate with the support of these “Dixiecrats” campaigning for States Rights i.e. keeping Jim Crow laws and segregation in place.

    In the 1960’s Nixon adopted what has been called “Southern Strategy” which was to capture the votes of the “whites” in the formerly Confederate States by supporting “States Rights” i.e. flying of the Confederate Flag at Statehouses and lack enforcement of Civil rights and Voting laws which in turn caused Black people to leave the Republican Party. Nixon argued that the Black votes he lost would be more than made up by the white votes he gained in the South. Since then the Republicans have had hegemony on the votes in the Southern states

    Today’s Republican Party is not as overt but the same attitudes prevail why did Reagan and Bush Jr. seek the endorsement of Bob Jones and visit the University as one of their first acts on the campaign trail?. Recently the US Supreme Court voted to invalidate sections of the Voting Rights act which effectively meant that nine Southern States can change Election laws without Federal approval and the Republican Governor of Texas moved immediately to change the law which will effectively constrain Black people from voting, other Republican led States are sure to follow.

    You can continue to admire the nonexistent party of Lincoln, but a black person voting for the Republicans would be like chickens voting for Colonel Sanders.

    Like

  • ‘If you are laying atrocities against Black people in America at the feet of the Democrats surely you must feel the same for the actions of the Brits, French, Spanish, Dutch, and Belgians et al who enslaved and colonialized our people (and others) all over the world. If Democrats were the party of Slavery today’s Republicans are the party of States rights”

    I thought that our line of thought was directed to President Kennedy and as a consequence the USA. The shameful role of the Europeans in conquering lands and enslaving people for their own benefit is well documented in history but there are some like the Kennedy’s of America whose fairy tale Camelot like roles are inflated beyond imagination for consumption by a gullible public. When their contributions are genuinely weighed in the balance, they are usually found wanting. unlike the contributions of unsung like Mahatma Gandhi, Mother Theresa, Rosa Parks, Winston Churchill, Wendel Mcclean, Steve Biko, Clement Payne, Uriah Butler, Marcus Garvey, for example.

    Like

  • “In the 1960’s Nixon adopted what has been called “Southern Strategy” which was to capture the votes of the “whites” in the formerly Confederate States by supporting “States Rights” i.e. flying of the Confederate Flag at Statehouses and lack enforcement of Civil rights and Voting laws which in turn caused Black people to leave the Republican Party. Nixon argued that the Black votes he lost would be more than made up by the white votes he gained in the South. Since then the Republicans have had hegemony on the votes in the Southern states”

    ALL OF THE ABOVE IS RECORDED AS TRUE BUT THAT DOES NOT NEGATE THE TRUTH EITHER THAT THE DEMOCRATS WERE THE PARTY OF SLAVERY AND SOME OF THE WORST ATROCITIES COMMITTED AGAINST BLACK PEOPLE WERE DURING THEIR TIME IN OFFICE ANDTHAT THEY HAVE HELD THE REINS OF POWER LONGER THAN ANY OTHER PARTY IN THE HISTORY OF AMERICAN GOVERNANCE AND HAVE BEEN THE BENEFICIARY OF THE MAJORITY BLACK VOTE SINCE THE POLITICAL EXPEDIENT POLICY OF NIXON TO CAPTURE THE WHITE DEMOCRATIC VOTE OF THE REPRESSIVE SOUTHERN STATES IN HIS BID FOR THE PRESIDENCY IN 1960 ANS THAT ONE OF THEIR HIGHEST RANKING AND LONGSERVING MEMBERS WAS THE NOW DECEASED ROBERT BYRD WHO HELD THE INFAMOUS TITLE OF GRAND WIZARD IN THE OPPRESSIVE KU KLUX KLAN ORGANIZATION FOR MANY YEARS AND THAT THE MAJORITY OF DEMOCRATS VOTED UP TO 1960 AGAINST THE CIVIL RIGHTS BILL AND VOTING RIGHTS BILL WHICH WAS PASSED BECAUSE OF REPUBLICAN MAJORITY SUPPORT AND THAT UP TO JANUARY 2008 , EVIDENCE INDICATES THAT PRESIDENT CLINTON’S FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE ROBERT REICH HAD REASON TO COMMENT ON CLINTON’S RACIALLY TINGED REMARKS AGAINST OBAMA AND I QUOTE ” BILL CLINTON’S ILL-TEMPERED AND ILL-FOUNDED ATTACKS ON BARACK OBAMA ARE DOING NO CREDIT TO THE FORMER PRESIDENT , HIS LEGACY, OR HIS WIFE’S CAMPAIGN. NOR ARE THEY HELPING THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY ( MY EMPHASIS WHAT IS THE CONCERN- THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY- READ MY LIPS) ..NOW, SADLY, WE’RE WITNESSING A SMEAR CAMPAIGN AGAINST OBAMA THAT EMPLOYS SOME OF THE WORST ASPECTS OF THE OLD POLITICS.”
    ALL THAT HAPPENED IS THAT OBAMA TUMPED AND OVERWHELMED THE PARTY MACHINE WITH THE KIND OF CAMPAIGN THEY HAD NEVER SEEN BEFORE AND SEEING THE WRITING ON THE WALL COMMONSENSE DICTATED THAT THEY DUMP THE ACKNOWLEGED AND PREFERRED PARTY CANDIDATE FOR A BRIGHT MIXED RACE GOODLOOKING FELLOW WITH THE PUBLIC BEHIND THEM WHO ‘WILL DO’

    Like

  • Today’s Republican Party is not as overt but the same attitudes prevail why did Reagan and Bush Jr. seek the endorsement of Bob Jones and visit the University as one of their first acts on the campaign trail?. Recently the US Supreme Court voted to invalidate sections of the ‘
    The difference between the two white parties is that the republicans do heir business overtly and I prefer it that way so I can know how I stand but the democrats praise blacks outwardly but despise them covertly and you know us blacks- only tell us things we want to hear and you could do we anything else. the DLP party has proven to be a maser of that tactic over the years.

    Like

  • Balance you attacking your party –mamomey -cutloose the middleclass Maloney will get ride of you from your employment and he got Denis in his pocket becareful

    Like

  • @balance
    Good points!

    The bottomline on politics and Politicians in the US and Bim is THEY WILL DO and SAY ANYTHING for VOTES!

    The last aspect that interests most Pols is what is the correct long term course of actions that leads to a much stronger Nation.

    Telling the populace the truth is not popular, so string them along for 4-8 years and tough if we ruin the country in the process. After all the Pols have good pension plans and thief plenty $$$$$ to feather their nests.

    Like

  • Balance
    Your responses are becoming seemingly “unbalanced” a man clutching at straws dragging the DLP, Winston Churchill and other figures into a conversation about American politics and racial divisiveness in the USA. You also mentioned the “white” Parties in the USA isn’t the majority of the population “white” at present? What should be the majority composition of the Parties?

    You have not refuted any of the facts presented about the actions of the Parties in the Post War period when the Democrats became more inclusive and amenable to Civil and Voting Rights the Republicans more exclusive. I also said that Kennedy was receptive to Civil Rights and met MLK and others when they couldn’t get an audience with his predecessor “Ike”.

    As for Obama at least he had a chance to succeed in the Democratic Party where is his equivalent in the Republican Party? Oh yes they had Michael Steele as Chair of the Party soon after Obama was elected and couldn’t wait to kick him out of Office and blame him for every misfortune that they encountered. I hope you had the opportunity to look up JC Watts once a rising “black” figure in the Republican Party and lastly this is 2013 soon to be 2014 don’t get stuck in 1913 the Universe is continuing to unfold.

    Like

  • like Ac you can continue to fool yourself that the Democratic party machine genuinely in the last 50 years have made such a dramatic volte-face to their repressive policies policies against blacks for over 150 years that hatred and oppression of blacks is now erased from their evil psyche. imght be all over the place but you can’t dispute what i havewritten..on another note, i should add that the DLP did do some progressive things up to 1976

    Like

  • Let me stress this point because we ough to understand this before we start to spewing our nonesense. Anyone who have had any knowledge of President Kennedy, knows quite well that he wasn’t a perfect man by any stretched of the human imagination. He have had his faults and failings as well as you and I. So we ought to start from that premise first friends.

    Like

  • Pingback: Facts about JFK | THE SCARECROW

  • The Americans do not have Royalty like Europeans and Africans. Therefore they tried to create the Kennedy Myth to compensate for lack of their own Royalty.

    JP Kennedy was a rascal and when Roosevelt appointed him to oversee the Stock Exchange he said, “you have to put a crook to catch crooks”.
    JPK asked the Chicago mafia to break legs in order to have his son elected.
    To this day it is likely that Nixon actually won that election! Death threats are a high level motivator!

    Like

  • Pingback: RFK – LBJ Transcripts | THE SCARECROW

Join in the discussion, you never know how expressing your view may make a difference.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s