THE JFK ASSASSINATION - WHITEWASHING AS EASY AS ABC-TV

I watched the 2-hour special Monday night (24 Nov 2025) and was shocked. This was a rehash of the type of special one would have seen in 1964 to bolster the Warren Commission, and repeated every decade or so with Dan Rather and other big names in the news to reassure us that the Warren Commission was correct, the magic bullet went through Kennedy's back/shoulder and out of his throat, thence to wound Texas Gov. Connally in various places, and emerge almost like new. Well, here they go again. Perhaps they are counting on many young viewers have no real knowledge of the events of 1963, so they cannot question the "information provided' on the program. 

     I am 87, a year older than Lee Oswald. My memory is not as sharp as before. But I sat fuming at the program. For example, on Oswald's background, it points out that he attended 20 different schools growing up, showing an unstable youth. However, when the young Oswald, who was born in New Orleans, returned, he attended P T G Beauregard Junion High 1952-1954. If he had problems adjusting, so did everyone else, as the School Board that year decided to integrate both junion and senior highs. I am not speaking of racial integration, that was clearly illegal in Louisiana and throughout the Solid South, but mixing boys and girls in the same schools, including high schools and the newly established junior highs. The previous system K-8, and the sexually divided high schools 9-12th grades ceased; replaced by K-6, 7-9, 10-12, all co-ed. Oswald did well enough to graduate from Beauregard in 2 years in 1954. Also important to his development, he joined the Civil Air Patrol, headed by a charismatic man, David Ferrie.

    I never met Ferrie, but I had a roommate who had had problems as a youth. Although I attended Tulane U., and he was a student at Loyola U. of the South, we met in the late 1950s at an intercollegiate interracial gathering at Loyola. I barely knew him, and he never looked me in the eye when conversing, so I assumed he was not interested in what I was saying. We both attended a CORE training institute in Miami in August 1960, where one day our teacher was Jackie Robinson, another day, Martin Luther King. It was only when we roomed together back in New Orleans did I discover that he was legally blind. No wonder he did not look people in the eyes, he probably was lucky to see the who person.  He told me he was on the path to becoming a juvenile delinquent, but the CAP and David Ferrie saved him, pushed him to return to school, gave him hope, etc. If Ferry could perform miracles with my roommate, perhaps he could do the same with Oswald. Ferry was gay, but my roommate was strictly straight. I suspect he may have done the same for Oswald. At any rate, Oswald did not want to continue to Warren Easton Senior High, but would continue his education elsewhere; he got his mom to sign papers so he could enlist in the Marines at 17. Some talk about Oswald as pro-communist as a youth. Are Communists anxious to enlist in the Marines at 17? By the way, Beauregard was the officer honored to give the command to CSA troops to fire on Fort Sumpter and start the American Civil War. After graduation from Loyola, my former roommate went off to Laos in the early 1960s with the US AID. He returned to NO, married and had 2 children, and led in many ways to improve the opportunities for the blind and handicapped. A university building is now named for him.  Meanwhile, Oswald ended in Japan working around the secret U2 flights. Ferrie was a very conservative patriot, and would clearly influence the youths in the CAP. Ferrie was a good pilot, and somehow involved in the Bay of Pigs invasion. He was furious when Pres. Kennedy failed to come to the rescue of the invaders, and later, in a speech, I think at Springhill college on the Mississippi coast, declared that Pres. Kennedy "should be shot." He lost is job as an airline pilot on a morals charge, but Car;ps Marcello and the Mafia also called upon Ferrie. Atty. Gen. Robert Kennedy's crusade against crime, led him to deport important New Orleans Mafia leader Carlos Marcello, and apparently left him in Guatemala in a jungle, wearing his expensive shoes. Some allege that Rob Kennedy hoped that Marcello would die.  Marcello survived however, reached civilization, and got Ferrie to come and fly him back into the US. 

     When Oswald defected to the Soviet Union, was it real? Or was he still a Marine, doing secret work? After a few years, he wanted out of the USSR, and had no troubles with American authorities in returning.. True, he had a dishonorable discharge from the Marines, but if the Marines were to send other undercovers to the Soviets, perhaps that was a way to keep the pretense going. 

     When Oswald returns to the US, and then to NO in 1963, who does he hang out with? The super anti-communist Guy Banister. Banister's office is where the pro-Castro leaflets, handed out by Oswald on the streets of NO, are stored; the address of the building is used on the Hand Off Cuba leaflets. Some say Oswald was seen at the CIA training center north of Lake Pontchartrain, where the Cuban refugees were preparing for a new and hopefully successful Bay of Pigs invasion to liberate Cuba. Pres. Kennedy was inching toward a rapprochement with the Communists and did not want another Bay of Pigs. But could he count on his head of CIA to close the camp? No! JFK needed someone he trusted to shutter the CIA camp; his brother Robert, Atty. Gen., was also in charge of the FBI. He got the FBI to close the CIA training camp in July 1963.  Some said, this act by the President sealed his fate.  It meant he was not interested in liberating Cuba, or standing up against the communists elsewhere, or so it seemed to many conservatives.

       Why was anti-com Banister working with Oswald to print and distribute Fair Play for Cuba leaflets and that pro-Castro organization? Perhaps Oswald was being prepared to appear as a communist, or surely a Marxist.  And with this new appearance, perhaps he was to assassinate someone, maybe like Fidel or another prominent figure! In September 1963 Oswald is in Mexico City trying to get into Cuba, making anti-Kennedy statements. But, it did not work; they did not let him in. MORE LATER

     If the now identified "Marxist" Lee Oswald could not get into Cuba or back into the USSR, what could he do for the cause? On 9 November 1963 anti-com Joseph Milteer was recorded on a wire by FBI undercover Willie Somersett, a childhood friend of Milteer.  Milteer assured his friend that it was all set up, someone from a tall building would shoot the President, and they had a stooge who would quickly be arrested and blamed, while the real assassins could get away.  Milteer added that people in Miami, New Orleans, and California were in on the action.  One can hear this recoded conversation on YouTube.  Was Oswald's new mission to be unbeknownst to him, a patsy?

       More on the ABC program; basically they declare what others call the magic bullet to be what really happened - Oswald shoots Kennedy's upper back, the bullet exits his neck, and then goes on to wound Gov. Connally in many places, and emerges almost like new. 

    In the late 1960s I was teaching at a university and had time between classes, time which I used to attend sessions of the DA Garrison trial against NO businessman Clay Shaw.  One day a doctor from the Bethesda Naval Hospital, one of the doctors who performed the autopsy on Pres. Kennedy.  He was questioned under oath.  Dr. Pierre Finck asserted he was beginning to probe the path of the bullet that entered the President's back, and which according to the official line must exit his throat and the go on to do damage to Connally, - this is a crucial probe.  Dr. Finck began, but then he related he was ordered to stop.  Who ordered that.  I don't know as there were many Admirals and Generals in the room.  Thus, with that answer of Dr. Finck, two important facts emerge.  One - the entire picture of the media, and the government, and the Warren Commission of one gunman shooting from behind the President WAS NOT CONFIRMED in the autopsy.  Recall, the physician in Dallas thought the neck wound was an entry wound, not an exit wound.  Two - Finck's reply  makes clear who was in charge of the proceedings, not the doctors but the military.  Moreover, some photos show a large part of the back of Kennedy's head being broken off, indicating a shot from the front.  Some allege there were fake photos showing a smaller back head wound.

    Garrison failed to convict Shaw, and had I been on the jury, I too would have voted not guilty.  But New Orleans Dist. Atty. Jim Garrison did expose how the government united to destroy his expose of the fraudulent conclusions of the Warren Report.  Governors refused to let subpoenaed witnesses come to NO for trial.  National magazines carried many stories belittling his case.  Only in the 1990s with Oliver Stone's provocative film "JFK" did the opponents of the official conclusion get a fair hearing, and viewing.  I don't recall enough of the ABC program to add more criticism to my post.  The ABC Special sought to put Humpty Dumpty back together again, but too much has been exposed for that to be successful at this late date. 

   I hope the Trump Administration will finally open all the files so we can see if the government told the truth to the American people, or simply lied, and lied, and lied.

     Hugh Murray

 

SEXUAL HARASSMENT FRENZY

THE SEXUAL HARASSMENT FRENZY OF 2017

by Hugh Murray

“On Friday's broadcast of HBO'S 'Real Time,' host Bill Maher declared:

“While discussing the allegations against Alabama Republican Senate nominee Judge Roy Moore during his opening monologue, Maher said, 'I've got to defend my tribe here a little bit, liberals vs. conservatives. Because certainly, sexual harassment is absolutely the one thing we see now is totally, truly bipartisan, maybe the last thing that is. But no liberal defended Harvey Weinstein or Kevin Spacey, who might be going to jail. Anthony Weiner is in jail. Louis CK, we hear, this week, did horrific things. Compare that to Trump and Roy Moore. We arrest our alleged rapists. They elect them.”(This item is by Ian Hanchett, posted on Breitbart 10 Nov. 2017)

Weiner did something illegal and was convicted in court. That is why he is in jail. What did Trump do? Or even Judge Moore? What has been proved? Indeed, what did Bill Maher write when Bill Clinton was president?

In his 1996 book Does Anybody Have a Problem with That?, Maher titles a short chapter “[Bill] Clinton Should Sleep Around.”:

“So far, Bill Clinton has been a big disappointment to me,...You see, …,I was sure we were finally getting a good old-fashioned, screwing around Kennedy Democrat in the White House – and wouldn't that be better? It would be in the eyes of all men out there, if they're honest with themselves.

“Because, to us men, the president isn't just the president, he's the tribal chieftain. He's the warrior with the greatest prowess, the longest spear, and as our chieftain, we look up to him to live beyond the strictures of normal man, as chieftains do. 'Bathe her and bring her to my tent' – that's what power is all about. All the men in America didn't agree with John F. Kennedy's politics, but they all respected him as a cocksman...

“...And please don't think it's infidelity itself that we admire, but the man is the president,...,and if he can't get some decent tail, what hope is there for the rest of us?(p.21)

“...Not to mention that many foreign leaders simply won't respect a president who isn't getting something on the side. We look at the world through American eyes, but in Latin America, to say nothing of Italy, if your president doesn't have a scandal, it's a scandal.”(22)

That was Bill Maher in a monologue that first aired 8 August 1993, in the first months of Bill Clinton's residency. Of course, Bill did sleep around, and more famously, stood in the Oval Office while intern Monica Lewinsky serviced him. True, Bill in his testimony swore he did not have sexual relations with that woman; and that lie was sufficient to get Clinton impeached, but insufficient to get him convicted and ousted from the White House.

In 2017, Maher seems to be reversing his earlier view. Today, we are in the midst of a wave to expose sexual predators. Each day's news contains new names of gropers, nudists showing all before before an unappreciative audience of one, masterbaters performing before shocked and disgusted guests, deep throat kissers, propositioners all aimed at ensnaring an attractive young lady (or in a few cases, a lad). Each day prominent names are besmirched with tantalizing accusations, men of power are apologizing, yet still being fired. Familiar names from Hollywood, TV, films, and now a Democratic Senator, and a Democratic Congressman, smeared with dirt. So, despite Maher's assertion of early November 2017, Democrats do elect alleged sexual predators. But in 1993 that is precisely why Maher was praising the Democrats – he wanted another John Kennedy, another cocksman in the White House. And how many times was Ted Kennedy, the “Lion of the Senate,” re-elected? Ted not only had a reputation as a player, he was also known as a poor swimmer. Only the meanest fanatics would criticize him for choosing his political career over collateral damage left in a sunken automobile.

In the early 1960s at university I wrote my MA thesis on the Scottsboro rape case, which began in Alabama in 1931. After the first trials, 8 young Blacks were sentenced to death, and the 14-year-old, to life imprisonment based on the testimony of 2 young white women. The cases went up and down to the US Supreme Court twice, and there was huge international interest and protest about the case, as the main defense team was led by the Communist front International Labor Defense. (Interestingly, the 2 leaders of the Scottsboro Defence Committee in the UK in the late 1930s were American Paul Robeson and Johnstone Kenyatta. Johnstone later became better known as Jomo, the leader of the Mau Mau uprising in his native Kenya. His son, Uhuru, was just reelected Kenyan President.) There were years of litigation about Scottsboro, and finally an illogical compromise. None of the 9 were executed, and some got out sooner than others. When one reads about the case, it seems clear that the women initially lied about the rape. At the 2^nd trial, one of the women repudiated her earlier claims and testified there was no rape. To me, and to most who study the case, it appears that the women lied about the rape. Women do make up stories.

During the Senate hearings to confirm Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas, National Public Radio reporter Nina Totenberg assured her radio audience, women do not make up stories. In effect, Anita Hill must be telling the truth. I thought, what BS! Thomas called the hearings a “legal lynching,” the identical phrase used by the Left of the 1930s to condemn the Alabama legal proceedings. If Hill had been so harassed, why had she followed Thomas to another job? Despite the feminist assault on the character of Thomas, he was confirmed and is still a Justice on the US Supreme Court.

The feminists did not give up. They continued their assault on the American judicial system, and many states enacted rape-shield laws. They vary from state to state, and they do not shield from rape. After an alleged rape, and the accused is found, his name can be publicized, but the woman's name is not disclosed to the public. The feminists contend that just exposing her name would expose her to ridicule and further humiliation. The alleged rapist should be humiliated by the media. But what if he is innocent? What if she has made false claims against him and others in the past? Is there any proof to support her claim. And to make the charges of rape after 40 years, as the woman has done in the case against Judge Moore in Alabama, how does she prove he did it? And after 40 years, how does Moore prove himself innocent? In cases where the rape-shield laws prevent publication of the woman's name, publicizing the man's name may encourage many women to come forth with similar charges against him, especially if he has money and they may get some. If her name were also in the media, one might learn more about her possibly unsavory, or criminal past that places her charges in a different perspective. I am a staunch opponent of feminist inspired rape-shield laws. And as bad as they are on the state level, they are far worse on many university campuses. There, the man may have no right to confront his accuser. Essential rights of the defendant have disappeared under feminist pressure, so the scales of justice on campus may be tilted overwhelmingly against the accused male.

Let me state clearly, rape is a crime and should be punished. But in the Alabama Senate race, the allegations against Republican Judge Moore are often flimsy to begin with – he was in his 30s dating teen-age girls. But some say the girls were 18 or 19 at the time. Is that a crime? Many men marry women a decade or two younger than they. Some men wait till they have accumulated more capital before marrying, and that can take time. Different is the allegation of the woman who speaks of an incident when she was 14. But why was she silent for 40 years? If in the year 2033 Monica Lewinsky were to first claim that she and Bill Clinton had it on in the Oval Office, many would rightly be skeptical. Moore is innocent until proved guilty. What is the proof by the woman? The burden of proof is and should be on her.

As much as I disagree with Judge Moore on gay rights and the 10 Commandments on public property, I view the Washington Post “expose” as a Democratic ploy to smear Moore. Worse, these Alabama political inspired accusations have sparked a witch hunt. Soon, if a TV emcee hugs a contestant who just won a prize, that may become grounds for a lawsuit and a firing. A man placing his arm round the shoulder of a woman to protect her from the cold, might come to mean sexual harassment or even pre-rape. To ask a woman out on a date; she declines. Perseverance, men were once taught. He asks again. Now, that might constitute harassment or even stalking. Have the man registered as a sex offender for asking for a date! We are entering a period of the witch hunt, often led by women who dislike men.

Angela Lansbury got flack by stating that some of the blame belonged on the women who dressed inappropriately. I think the issue is more complex. I think that both men and women should go after what they want. And both have the right to reject what the do not want.

Going back to Hollywood and Weinstein. I suspect that many a starlet who first enters a film studio wants to ask, “Where is the casting couch?” And male actors too. They are young, beautiful, and want to get in the films while they look good, and the couch may be the fastest track to stardom. Is this only Hollywood and the rich? No way. This is universal. I just read a book that includes an incident from Mao's Cultural Revolution. A naive young city gal is forced to move to the countryside and live among the peasants; she learns that one way to get lighter work-loads and a trip to the city is to “befriend” a party leader. She did not, she was not raped, but she received no privileges. I suspect this is a common feature throughout history and throughout the world.

But how can the woman show whom she is interested in? Here Lansbury's remark about clothing is important. For the woman in the West, how much do you reveal? And to whom. In public, it is hard to cover, open, cover, to each person. But charm can be used to entice the ones you want, a look of disgust to dissuade others.

Men in the West often used touch, sometimes protectively, for many women, and a little more caressingly for the special ones. Is this now to be a crime of harassment? To ask for a date – harassment? A 2^nd time, stalking? To look too closely at the breast, pervert? A word about how good she looks, harassment, sexist, etc.

We must stop the march of the feminists and their attempts to build walls between men and women. America is now engaged in a witch hunt, a hunt led by the witches.