FINAL JUDGMENT
The Missing Link in the
JFK Assassination Conspiracy
By MICHAEL COLLINS PIPER
Chapter Two
Off With His Head: A Mossad Plot
to Kill an American President
Would Israel's Mossad actually consider assassinating an
American president perceived hostile to Israel? A former
Mossad agent says "yes." According to ex-Mossad man Victor
Ostrovsky, the Israeli spy agency hatched a plan to kill
President George Bush.
If President John F. Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy
orchestrated—at least in part—by Israel's spy agency, the Mossad, this
evidently not be the last time that the Mossad planned the assassination of
an American president. According to former Mossad agent, Victor
Ostrovsky, elements of the Mossad were plotting an attempt on the life of
President George Bush. The reason: according to Ostrovsky, Bush was hated
by the Mossad and considered an enemy of Israel.
This amazing revelation was published in the February 1992 edition of
the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs. The author of the report was
former Congressman Paul Findley (R-Ill.), himself a prominent critic of
Israel. (Findley's best-selling book, They Dare to Speak Out: People and
Institutions Confront Israel's Lobby, is a classic exposition of the way
Israel's lobby has worked to silence American critics of the foreign nation.)
Findley reported that Ostrovsky had learned through his sources in the
intelligence community that because of President Bush's seeming
intransigence toward Israel's demands, the Mossad had begun coordinating
plans for the assassination of the American president.
Ostrovsky relayed this information to several members of the Canadian
parliament, indicating that the Mossad and not Israel's elected leadership, is
"the real engine of policy in Israel." 8 One of those attending the meeting
with Ostrovsky passed the information on to another former U.S.
Representative, Paul N. (Pete) McCloskey (R-Calif.).
Upon learning of the potential threat to President Bush, ex-Congressman
McCloskey himself flew to Canada where he met with
Ostrovsky. According to Findley: "Ostrovsky impressed McCloskey as a
patriotic Zionist who believes the Mossad is out of control. Ostrovsky told
him the present leadership of the Mossad wants 'to do everything possible
to preserve a state of war between Israel and its neighbors, assassinating
President Bush, if necessary." 9
"He said a public relations campaign is already underway in both Israel
and the United States to 'prepare public acceptance of vice president Dan
Quayle as president.' After lengthy discussion during which he became
convinced that Ostrovsky was 'real' and telling the truth, McCloskey took
the next flight to Washington.
"There he relayed the information to the Secret Service and State
Department, receiving mixed reactions to Ostrovsky's reliability. An officer
of the Navy Department dismissed him simply as a "traitor to Israel."10
AMERICANS KILLED BY ISRAELI INTRIGUE
Findley points out that in his controversial book, By Way of
Deception, the aforementioned Ostrovsky documented a Mossad action
which was "especially shocking to American readers."11 In that instance,
241 U.S. Marines were murdered by a terrorist truck bomb that plowed into
the Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983.
Although Israeli agents learned that the attack was impending, the
Mossad headquarters in Tel Aviv ordered its agents to ignore the threat and
to not alert the American servicemen to the danger. "We are not there in
Beirut to protect Americans," the Mossad leaders explained. "They're a big
country. Send only the regular information." According to Ostrovsky, the
"regular information" was "like sending a weather report, unlikely to raise
any particular alarm."12
"Is it conceivable," asks Findley, "that Israel's Mossad might
assassinate George Bush in order to put a more sympathetic man in the
White House? It is well to remember two earlier occasions when Israeli
authorities were willing to sacrifice American lives to serve their own
national interests." 13 Congressman Findley points out two other occasions
where Americans died or otherwise faced extinction at the hands of Israel:
On June 8, 1967, naval and air forces of Israel deliberately—and
without provocation—attacked the American spy ship, the U.S.S. Liberty
killing 34 American sailors and wounding 171 others. It was an attempt to
destroy the ship and its entire crew.
During the October 1973 war, Israeli pilots were ordered to shoot
down an unarmed U.S. reconnaissance plane that was overflying Israel's
secret nuclear bomb development site at Dimona. The plane, however, flew
too high for Israel's would-be assassins to reach.
Assessing the potential threat to President George Bush, Congressman
Findley concludes, "The U.S. Secret Service will be wise to assume the
worst."14
Incredibly enough, at almost the same time Findley's provocative report
first appeared, several unusual events occurred that seemed to give credence
to the allegation that there might indeed be a plot afoot to eliminate George
Bush—if not physically, at least politically. Each of these threatening
incidents took place during President George Bush's January 1992 trip to the
Far East.
The most notable incident, of course, was the President's bizarre public
seizure while dining in the company of the Japanese premier. More than a
few people speculated—privately—that the president might indeed have been
poisoned. This, of course, is speculation, but it is based in reality.
Interestingly, it was while the president was on his Far Eastern junket
that The Washington Post—the daily newspaper of record in the nation's capitol—inexplicably reversed itself and began publishing a lengthy and
glowing seven-part series hailing Vice President Dan Quayle. Obviously
this seems to be a confirmation of Victor Ostrovsky's claim that
preparations were being made in the United States to make a Dan Quayle
presidency palatable.
The Post's unusual flip-flop was made all the more potent when the
news arrived that the president had been stricken. Quayle, evidently, already
had the Establishment's support if he had been unexpectedly thrust into the
presidency. Oddly, prior to the Post's turn-about, the Washington daily had
been one of Quayle's most persistent critics. However, something quite
alarming also took place during that eventful week.
A SECURITY BREACH
For two days, during President George Bush's visit in Seoul, South
Korea, top-secret information regarding the president's personal
arrangements was inexplicably made available to the public. Incredibly
enough, this was during a period when terrorist alert status was already high.
Security experts believed that if potential presidential assassins had such
action in mind, the security breach would have assisted them tremendously.
According to Robert Snow, a spokesman for the Secret Service, "It wouldn't
be stretching it"15 to suggest that the security lapse could have put Bush in
danger. Blame for the lapse in security was laid at the hands of the U.S.
Information Service (U.S.I.S), a branch of the State Department. For their
own part, officials at the State Department were unable to provide an
explanation of the bizarre security breach. The White House refused to
comment.
The U.S.I.S published a list of the names and hotel room numbers of the
president's traveling party, which numbered 471 people. (The fact that the
president was staying at the U.S. Ambassador's residence was part of the
information revealed.) Included on the list were the names and room
numbers of 122 Secret Service agents, eight Marine guards, four presidential
stewards and six military aides. Also revealed were security control room
locations in the hotel where the president was staying as well as the names
of the 10 Secret Service agents heading security at the various locations that
the president visited while in Korea. The room assignments of top
administration officials accompanying the president, as well as those of the
thirteen corporate executives along for the trip were also published. 16
This incredible revelation caused suspicion that perhaps there were those
in positions of power who may not necessarily have been concerned for the
president's safety. The tentacles of Israel's Mossad do reach far and wide—
even into the depths of the U.S. State Department. Was this breach of
security a first step in an assassination attempt—perhaps one to be carried out
by some obscure Korean terrorist group acting as a "false flag" for the
Mossad?
Retired Air Force Col. L. Fletcher Prouty, himself an acknowledged
authority on covert operations—including assassination planning—says that one of the primary necessary measures in any assassination plot is the
process of removing or otherwise breaching the intended victim's blanket of
security. Prouty, who worked in presidential security with the military,
knows whereof he speaks. According to Prouty, "No one has to direct an
assassination—it happens. The active role is played secretly by permitting it
to happen . . . This is the greatest single clue . . . Who has the power to
call off or reduce the usual security precautions that are always in effect
whenever a president travels?" 17
IF IN 1991, WHY NOT IN 1963?
In his 1994 book, The Other Side of Deception, Mossad man Victor
Ostrovsky finally revealed the specifics of what he had learned of the 1991
Mossad plot against Bush: the Mossad planned to assassinate Bush during
an international conference in Madrid. The Mossad had captured three
Palestinian "extremists" and leaked word to the Spanish police that the
terrorists were on their way to Madrid. The plan was to kill Bush, release
the "assassins" in the midst of the confusion—and kill the Palestinians on
the spot. The crime would be blamed on the Palestinians—another Mossad
"false flag," more about which we will learn in Chapter Three. 18
SOME HISTORICAL SPECULATION
Frankly, there have been those who have suggested, in the wake of the
publication of the first edition of Final Judgment, that President Franklin
Delano Roosevelt, in fact, may himself have been the first American
president to die at the hands of the intelligence network that ultimately
evolved into Israel's Mossad. They point out, based on well-documented
historical evidence, that FDR may have been a genuine roadblock in the way
of the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine.
It is known that Saudi King Abd al-Aziz Ibn Saud met with FDR on
board a U.S. Navy ship on February 14, 1945 when the American president
was returning from the famous Yalta Conference. There, according to former
American diplomat Richard Curtiss, the Saudi king "exacted assurances from
the President that he would 'do nothing to assist the Jews against the Arabs
and would make no move hostile to the Arab people.'" 19
After that meeting, according to Curtiss, FDR "told friends that in a
few minutes of conversation with the Saudi monarch he learned more about
the Palestine situation than he had learned in all of his previous life. His
new knowledge did not prevent him, however, from authorizing a U.S.
Zionist leader to state that the President still favored a Jewish state and
unrestricted Jewish immigration into Palestine.
"Then, as the Arabs reacted with angry questions, he authorized the
Department of State to reaffirm his pledge to Ibn Saud and other Arab
leaders that there would be prior consultation with the Arabs as well as the
Jews before the U.S. took any action related to Palestine." 20 One week later
FDR was dead.
In fact, two authors known for their devotion to the Zionist
cause—John Loftus and Mark Aarons—have stated candidly that many
friends of Israel do believe that FDR's death was quite fortuitous: "Although
American public opinion was favorable toward Jews, few Zionists trusted
Roosevelt entirely . . . As several leading Zionists admitted, if Roosevelt
had lived, it is unlikely that Israel would ever have been born. They knew
what they were talking about.” 21
AN INTERESTING FOOTNOTE IN HISTORY
We could speculate forever about how FDR really died. However, we do
know—based on a very reliable source—that FDR's successor, Harry
Truman, was in fact the target for assassination because he was perceived
hostile to Zionist interests. According to Margaret Truman, daughter of the
late president, the Jewish underground terrorist movement in Palestine
known as the Stern Gang once tried to murder her father. In a biography of her father Miss Truman discussed the attempt on her father's life by Puerto Rican nationalists. Then, in a little-noticed, but highly significant aside she commented: "I learned in the course of my research for this book that there had been other attempts on Dad's life, which he never mentioned . . . In the summer of 1947, the so-called Stern gang of Palestine terrorists tried to assassinate Dad by mail . . .” 22
The Jewish terrorists, it seems, had sent the president letters that had been tainted with toxic chemicals. Fortunately, the mail was intercepted and no harm was done. Harry Truman, of course, got the message, though, and rushed to recognize the state of Israel upon its founding in 1948, despite his own reservations and those on the part of his diplomatic advisers.
This clumsy attempt to kill Truman is interesting, to say the very least, and points to a proclivity for political violence on the part of the Israeli leaders in the Stern Gang whom, it should be pointed out, were the very individuals who emerged as the leaders of the Mossad following the establishment of the state of Israel.
A PATTERN OF EVIDENCE . . .
Very clearly, there is strong evidence—indeed a pattern—to suggest that
Israel would indeed consider the assassination of an American president.
With this in mind, let us move forward and examine the evidence which will
lead us toward a final judgment.
Chapter Three
A Bad Habit:
Israel's Use of "False Flags" in Global Terrorism—
Pointing the Finger of Guilt Elsewhere
Researchers in the JFK assassination controversy have
repeatedly pointed out the false leads that continue to appear.
Most believe that Lee Harvey Oswald, the alleged assassin,
was indeed what he claimed to be—the patsy—and that false
clues had been laid by the real conspirators to make it appear
as though Oswald was an agent of Fidel Castro or the
Soviets or both. The use of such "false flags" by Israel's
Mossad to cover up its own role in worldwide assassination
conspiracies and other criminal activity has been documented
time and again. "Arabs," "the Mafia," "right-wing
extremists," and others have repeatedly taken the fall for
crimes committed by the Mossad or carried out under its
coordination.The use of "false flag" operations by Israel and its Mossad has been documented repeatedly since the Jewish State first came into being. This book contends that Israel and its primary collaborator, the CIA, utilized insidious "false flags" in orchestrating the assassination of John F. Kennedy and the subsequent cover-up: "the Mafia," "anti-Castro Cubans," "the Soviets," "Castro agents" and even "right-wing extremists" have all been fingered as those responsible for the JFK assassination. But the real hard evidence points in another direction entirely.
'FORGED TRAILS' AND 'FALSE FLAGS'
One major JFK assassination researcher, Professor Peter Dale Scott, has
described what he called "the brilliance of the assassination plot."23 This
was, according to Scott, "that the conspirators had forged trails to induce a
cover-up." Scott cites a number of instances: "There were, for example,
trails that potentially linked Oswald to Fidel Castro or to the KGB and Khrushchev—a trail that might lead to war. "Moreover, there was false evidence given to the Secret Service that led to a group of anti-Castro Cubans in Chicago whose operations had been authorized indirectly by Bobby Kennedy himself. This is just one of several trails that might have led in directions that no one wanted to investigate."24
That Israel has had a long and proven record in planting "false flags" is the subject of discussion in this chapter. In preparation for our consideration of Israel's role in the JFK assassination conspiracy, it is worthwhile to first review some of the more notable instances in which Israel orchestrated assassinations and pinned those atrocities on innocent parties—"false flags."
In Chapter 2 we noted how former Congressman Paul Findley had cited two cases in which Israel indicated a willingness to sacrifice American lives for its own interests: (a) the attack on the U.S.S. Liberty in June of 1967 and (b) the intended attack on an American reconnaissance plane that was overflying Israel's secret nuclear bomb development site. These incidents are particularly intriguing in light of what we will ponder in this volume.
The attack on the Liberty—it is generally acknowledged by everyone but Israel and its defenders—was a deliberate attempt to destroy the Liberty and its crew and to sink the vessel to the bottom of the Mediterranean. What is most interesting, however, is the reason behind this bizarre and brutal attack.
THE U.S.S. LIBERTY
BLAMING THE EGYPTIANS
Israel, in fact, hoped to pin the responsibility on a "false flag"—Egypt—
and draw the United States into the impending 1967 war on the side of
Israel. It is only because the Liberty did not sink and instead was rescued
that the history books don't tell us today that "the Arabs" sunk an American
spy ship and sparked another "Lusitania incident" that forced America to go
to war.
THE NUCLEAR BOMB
The second instance to which Congressman Findley referred is of
special interest inasmuch as the intended attack on an American air force
reconnaissance plane was designed to protect Israel's secret development of
nuclear weaponry. It was Israel's nuclear offensive that led President John F.
Kennedy into the "secret war" with Israel that he conducted with increasing
intensity during the three years of his short-lived presidency. As we shall see in Chapter 5, it was the very issue of Kennedy's intransigent opposition to Israel's nuclear arms development that became a central part of his standoff with Israel and its Mossad. It was this conflict that played a critical part in setting in final motion the assassination conspiracy that ended John Kennedy's life.
What follows is an overview of some other notable instances in which Israel utilized 'false flags" in its international criminal endeavors.
THE LAVON AFFAIR
Perhaps the best-known instance in which Israel used a "false flag" to
cover its own trail was in the infamous Lavon Affair. It was in 1954 that
several Israeli-orchestrated acts of terrorism against British targets in Egypt
were carried out. Blame for the attacks was placed on the Muslim
Brotherhood, which opposed the regime of Egyptian President Gamul Abdul-Nasser. However, the truth about the wave of terror can now be
found in a once-secret cable from Colonel Benjamin Givli, the head of
Israel's military intelligence, who outlined the intended purpose behind the
wave of terror: "Our goal is to break the West's confidence in the existing [Egyptian] regime. The actions should cause arrests, demonstrations, and expressions of revenge. The Israeli origin should be totally covered while attention should be shifted to any other possible factor. The purpose is to prevent economic and military aid from the West to Egypt." 25
Ultimately the truth about Israel's involvement in the affair became public and Israel was rocked internally in the wake of the scandal. Competing political elements within Israel used the scandal as a bludgeon against their opponents. But the truth about Israel's use of a "false flag" had come to international attention and demonstrated how Israel was indeed willing to needlessly endanger innocent lives as part of its grand political strategy to expand its influence in the Middle East.
BLAMING 'RIGHT-WING EXTREMISTS'
A shadowy "right wing" group known as "Direct Action" was accused
of the attack on Goldenberg's Deli in Paris on August 9, 1982. Six people
died and 22 were injured. The leader of "Direct Action" was one Jean-Marc
Rouillan. Rouillan had been operating in the Mediterranean under the cover
name of "Sebas" and had been repeatedly linked to the Mossad. All
references to Rouillan's Mossad links were deleted from the official reports
issued at the time. However, the Algerian national news service—which has ties to French intelligence—blamed the Mossad for Rouillan's activities. Angry French intelligence officers were believed to have leaked this information to the Algerians. Several top French security officials quit in protest over this coverup of Mossad complicity in Rouillan's crimes. 26 However, other Mossad orchestrated false flag operations also took place on French soil.
On October 3, 1980 a synagogue on Copernicus Street was bombed in Paris. Four bystanders were killed. Nine were injured. The media frenzy which followed the incident was worldwide. Reports held that "right wing extremists" were responsible. Yet, of all of the "right wing extremists" held for questioning, none was arrested. In fact, all were released.
In the upper echelons of French intelligence, however, the finger of suspicion was pointed at the Mossad. According to one report: "On April 6, 1979, the same Mossad terror unit now suspected of the Copernicus carnage blew up the heavily guarded plant of CNIM industries at La Seyne-sur-Mer, near Toulon, in southeast France, where a consortium of French firms was building a nuclear reactor for Iraq.
"The Mossad salted the site of the CNIM bomb blast with 'clues' followed up with anonymous phone calls to police—suggesting that the sabotage was the work of a 'conservative' environmentalist Troup—'the most pacific and harmless people on earth' as one source put it." 27
BLAMING THE CORSICAN MAFIA
On June 28, 1978, Israeli agents exploded a bomb under a small
passenger car in the Rue Saint Anne, killing Mohammed Boudia, an
organizer for the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). Immediately
afterward, Paris police received anonymous phone calls accusing Boudia of
involvement in narcotics deals and attributing his murder to the Corsican
Mafia. A thorough investigation subsequently established that Mossad
special-action agents were responsible for the terrorist killing.
BLAMING THE NEO-NAZIS
In October, 1976 the same Mossad unit kidnapped two West German
students named Brigette Schulz and Thomas Reuter from their Paris hotel.
Planted "clues" and anonymous phone calls made it appear that a Bavarian
"neo-nazi" formation had executed the abduction. In fact, French
intelligence established that the two German youths had been secretly flown
to Israel, drugged, tortured, coerced into a false "confession of complicity" in
PLO activities, and then anonymously incarcerated in one of the Israeli
government's notorious political prisons.
BLAMING THE SOUTH KOREANS
In February 1977 a German-born, naturalized U.S. citizen named
William Jahnke arrived in Paris for some secretive business meetings. He
soon vanished, leaving no trace. Paris police were anonymously informed
that Jahnke had been involved in a high-level South Korean bribery affair
and "eliminated" when the deal went sour. A special team of investigators
from S.D.E.C.E, the leading French intelligence agency, eventually determined
that Jahnke had been "terminated" by the Mossad, which suspected him of
selling secret information to the Libyans. Along with other details of this
sordid case, the S.D.E.C.E learned that Jahnke had been "fingered" to the
Mossad by his own former employer, the CIA.28
BLAMING THE LIBYANS
One of Israel's most outrageous "false flag" operations involved a wild
propaganda story aimed at discrediting Libyan leader Muamar Qaddafi—one
of Israel's favorite enemies. In the early months of the administration of
President Ronald Reagan, the American media began heavily promoting a
story to the effect that a "Libyan hit squad" was in the United States for the
express purpose of assassinating Reagan. This inflamed public sentiment
against Libya and there were repeated calls for blood. 
The Los Angeles Times itself had already blown the whistle on Israel's scare stories. "Israeli intelligence, not the Reagan administration," reported the Times, "was a major source of some of the most dramatic published reports about a Libyan assassination team allegedly sent to kill President Reagan and other top U.S. officials . . . Israel, which informed sources said has 'wanted an excuse to go in and bash Libya for a longtime,' may be trying to build American public support for a strike against [Qaddafi], these sources said." 30
In other words, Israel had been promoting the former SAVAK agent, Ghorbanifar, to official Washington as a reliable source. In fact, he was a Mossad disinformation operative waving a "false flag" to mislead America. This was yet another Israeli scheme to blame Libya for its own misdeeds, this time using one "false flag" (Iran's SAVAK) to lay the blame on another "false flag" (Libya). (In Chapter 18 we shall see yet another SAVAK crime carried out on behalf of Israel and its allies in the CIA.)
BLAMING LIBYA AGAIN
Israel's Mossad was almost certainly responsible for the bombing of the
La Belle discotheque in West Berlin on April 5, 1986. However, claims
were made that there was "irrefutable" evidence that the Libyans were
responsible. A U.S. serviceman was killed. President Ronald Reagan
responded with an attack on Libya.
However, intelligence insiders believed that Israel's Mossad had
concocted the phony "evidence" to "prove" Libyan responsibility. West
Berlin police director Manfred Ganschow, who took charge of the
investigation, cleared the Libyans, saying, "This is a highly political case.
Some of the evidence cited in Washington may not be evidence at all,
merely assumptions supplied for political reasons." 31
BLAMING THE SYRIANS
On April 18, 1986 one Nezar Hindawi, a 32 year old Jordanian was
arrested in London after security guards found that one of the passengers
boarding an Israeli plane bound for Jerusalem, Ann Murphy, 22, was
carrying a square, flat sheet of plastic explosive in the double bottom of her
carry-on bag. Miss Murphy told security men that the detonator (disguised
as a calculator) had been given to her by her finance, Hindawi. He was
charged with attempted sabotage and attempted murder. Word was leaked that Hindawi had confessed and claimed that he had been hired by Gen. Mohammed Al-Khouli, the intelligence director of the Syrian air force. Also implicated were others including the Syrian Ambassador in London. The French authorities warned the British Prime Minister that there was more to the case than met the eye—that is, Israeli involvement. This was later confirmed in reports in the Western press. 32
BLAMING THE PLO
In 1970, King Hussein of Jordan was provided with incriminating
intelligence that suggested the Palestine Liberation Organization was
plotting to murder him and seize power in his nation. Infuriated, Hussein
mobilized his forces for what has become known as the 'Black September'
purge of the PLO. Thousands of Palestinians living in Jordan were rounded
up, some of the leaders were tortured, and in the end, masses of refugees
were driven from Jordan to Lebanon. New data, coming to light after the murder of two leading Mossad operatives in Larnaka, Cyprus suggested that the entire operation had been a Mossad covert action, led by one of its key operatives, Sylvia Roxburgh. She contrived an affair with King Hussein and served as the linchpin for a major Mossad coup designed to destabilize the Arabs. 33
In 1982, just when the PLO had abandoned the use of terrorism, the Mossad spread disinformation about "terror attacks" on Israeli settlements along the northern border in order to justify a full-scale military invasion of Lebanon. Years later, even leading Israeli spokesmen, such as former Foreign Minister Abba Eban, admitted that the reports of "PLO terrorism" had been contrived by the Mossad. 34
It is also worth noting that the attempted assassination—in London—of Israeli Ambassador to England, Shlomo Argov, was initially blamed upon the PLO.
The attempted assassination was cited by Israel as one excuse for its bloody 1982 incursion into Lebanon. In fact, the diplomat in question was considered one of Israel's "doves" and inclined toward a friendly disposition of Israel's longtime conflict with the PLO. He was the least likely target of PLO wrath. What's more, one of the suspects in the crime was found carrying a "hit list" which actually included the name of the head of the PLO office in London. 35 Thus, it appears that the assassination attempt was carried out by the Mossad—under yet another "false flag"—for two purposes: (a) elimination of a domestic "peacenik" considered friendly toward the Palestinians; and (b) pinning yet another crime on the Palestine Liberation Organization.
WHY FRAME OSWALD AS
A 'PRO-CASTRO AGITATOR'?
These instances cited here are but a handful of Mossad-orchestrated
"false flag" operations blamed on a wide variety of alleged "suspects." The
evidence that we shall be examining in Final Judgment suggests that the
assassination of John F. Kennedy was yet another "false flag" conspiracy by
Israel's Mossad and its collaborators in the American CIA. We now know, based upon years of study by numerous JFK assassination researchers, that prior to the JFK assassination, the accused assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, was being set up as a patsy. Indeed, Oswald's activities were presented as proof that a "pro-Castro agitator" had been the "lone nut" behind the president's assassination.
If anything—we should note at this juncture—Lee Harvey Oswald's identity as a "pro-Castro agitator"—the role he played prior to the JFK assassination—was tailor-made for (or, perhaps we should say, tailor-made by) the CIA and its allies in the Mossad. What few JFK assassination researchers have noted (or perhaps even understood) was that Fidel Castro's Cuba had long been hostile to Israel and the cause of Zionism. Thus, both the Mossad and the CIA would find a "pro-Castro agitator" an ideal patsy.
In a lengthy essay the Castro government published in the November 4, 1979 edition of Granma—an official newspaper—the Cuban Marxists critiqued Israel and Zionism. Castro's newspaper said, in part:
"The Zionists never did, and never will, forgive the Soviet state and its Leninist Party . . . because the Bolsheviks implemented a correct policy that incorporated the talents and efforts of the Soviet Jews into the tasks of building a new society and thus demonstrated the class origins of discrimination and anti-Semitism, breaking with the past and providing a genuine solution to the Jewish problem, a solution which was not and could never be a massive exodus to Palestine.
"With the outbreak of the cold war the Zionists collaborated in all the subversive and diversionary activities against the USSR and other socialist countries. The secret services of the Zionist state of Israel coordinated their spy activities with the CIA. And to complete the picture there is the Zionist counter-revolutionary action against the national liberation movements.
"The Zionists became a power and succeeded in establishing their own state in 1948. Now their task is to defend oil routes, protect all the interests of U.S. imperialism and block the advance of the Arab revolution. Neither the machinations of Zionist counterrevolution, nor Israeli arms, can hold back the victorious march of the peoples of the world." 36
These are fighting words, to say the least, and do explain perhaps why those who were responsible for framing Lee Harvey Oswald would have selected his profile as a "pro-Castro agitator." The profile would satisfy both the hard-line anti-communists and the Zionists.
In subsequent years, as the initial cover story that Oswald was a proCastro agitator began to unravel and new fallback targets have been named— primarily "the Mafia." It was the Mossad and its allies in the CIA and in the controlled American media who have been doing all the fingering. Everybody being blamed by the Mossad and its CIA allies were implicated and everybody, as a consequence, had a stake in the cover-up.
JFK AND SECRET DEALS
To achieve the presidency in 1960, John F. Kennedy was forced to cut
secret deals—behind the scenes—with a variety of powerful forces intricately
linked to Israel. In Chapter 4 we shall examine the history of those deals and
how they played a part in the JFK assassination conspiracy.
Chapter Four
No Love Lost:
JFK, Meyer Lansky,
the Mafia & the Israeli Lobby
There was a long history of bitter enmity between John
F. Kennedy and his powerful father Ambassador Joseph P.
Kennedy and organized crime boss Meyer Lansky, stemming
in part from the senior Kennedy's deals with the underworld.
This, however, did not stop the Kennedy family from cutting
deals with the crime syndicate when it came to winning
elections. The Kennedy family's alleged anti-Semitism didn't do anything to improve JFK's relations with Israel and its American lobby either. Kennedy's intervention in the issue of Algerian independence from France also drew sharp criticism from the Israeli lobby as well. Yet, when John F. Kennedy sought the presidency, he was willing to cut deals with the Israeli lobby—for a price.
By the end of his presidency, however, Kennedy had reneged on his deals, not only with Israel's Godfather, Meyer Lansky, and his henchmen in the Mafia, but also with the Israeli lobby.
John F. Kennedy was very much a product of his father's upbringing— much to the dismay, it might be said, of many of even JFK's most devout disciples. They would, frankly, prefer to forget much of the recorded history of the Kennedy family and present JFK as something just short of being a saint.
That President John F. Kennedy was the son of Ambassador Joseph P. Kennedy long perceived to be, at the very least, neutral to the ambitions of Nazi Germany—and, at the worst, an anti-Semite and even an admirer of Adolf Hitler—has been a lot for Kennedy's admirers to swallow.
Ambassador Kennedy, of course, fought U.S. entry into World War II. Several accounts of the period suggest that Kennedy himself returned from Britain, where he served as American ambassador, with the intent of launching a major campaign against President Roosevelt's war plans.
However, after a meeting at the White House between the ambassador and the president, Kennedy backed off. What happened during that meeting is ripe for speculation.
JFK, HITLER AND THE WAR IN EUROPE
What is interesting to note (and definitely little known) is that at the
same time Ambassador Kennedy was fighting against American
involvement in what became the Second World War, his sons Joe Jr. and
John were also promoting the same agenda.Joe, Jr., as a student at Harvard, served on the Harvard Committee Against Military Intervention in Europe, described as "a reactionary group that petitioned influential government officials and held rallies opposing American entry in the European war effort."37
More significantly, however, it appears that JFK himself was under steady surveillance by J. Edgar Hoover's FBI because of his anti-war activities. JFK was accused by the FBI of voicing "anti-British and defeatist sentiments and blaming Winston Churchill for getting the United States into the war . . . It also appears," charged the FBI, "that Kennedy had prepared for his father at least one of the speeches which his father had made, or was intending to make, in answer to criticism of his alleged appeasement policies . . . In addition Jack Kennedy stated that in his opinion England was through, and his father's greatest mistake was not talking enough, that he stopped talking too soon." 38
Young Jack Kennedy, as a Harvard student, was more than neutral toward Hitler, it seems. Having visited Mussolini's Italy, Stalin's Russia and Hitler's Germany, JFK recorded in his diary, according to Time magazine, that he had come "to the decision that Facism [sic] is the thing for Germany and Italy, Communism for Russia and Democracy for America and England."39 Youthful musings, but interesting, to say the least.
KENNEDY AND THE 'FASCIST'
After the war was underway, JFK's father, Ambassador Kennedy,
actively considered involvement in a scheme to cut the war short—in
opposition to President Roosevelt. Kennedy's biographer, Richard Whalen, has written of a secret meeting between Kennedy and a prominent critic of the Roosevelt administration, the controversial publicist, Lawrence Dennis. Often described (inaccurately) as "America's leading fascist," Dennis was a former diplomat himself and one of the early leaders in the effort to block American intervention in what evolved into World War II. Consequently, he and Kennedy had much in common.
Kennedy's biographer outlined the circumstances of that secret meeting—a meeting which says much about Kennedy's line of thinking:
"In October 1943, Lawrence Dennis received a telephone call from his friend, Paul Palmer, then a senior editor of The Reader's Digest. Before the war, Dennis had contributed to the Digest, but the author of The Coming American Fascism since had become too controversial for his byline to appear in the nation's largest magazine. Now he received a $500-a-month retainer as an editorial consultant.
"One of his recent efforts had been a memorandum sharply critical of unconditional surrender and the rumored plans to break up Germany. Palmer invited Dennis to lunch in his suite in Manhattan's St. Regis Hotel, saying he would meet someone there who was thinking along similar lines.
"It turned out to be Joe Kennedy. Over lunch, Kennedy said he had been seeing Archbishop Spellman almost daily. He said the Archbishop had returned from Rome with word that Hitler's generals might attempt to overthrow him if they were offered terms less hopeless than unconditional surrender.
"Kennedy grew emotional and castigated Roosevelt. He talked of his two sons in the service, and declared that the war could be ended within two weeks if the German generals were given encouragement.
"Of course, no Church official could speak out against the folly of Roosevelt's policy, but Kennedy could, and this had been Palmer's purpose in arranging the luncheon. The editor asked whether the former Ambassador would write, or at least sign, an article condemning unconditional surrender. The impact of such an article, given Kennedy's former standing in the administration, could be enormous. But he did not accept the invitation and the war being fought by his sons and so many other young men raged on.” 40
Ambassador Kennedy no doubt remembered this meeting for the rest of his days. He was very bitter about the war and particularly bitter at Franklin D. Roosevelt. Kennedy once allegedly referred to FDR as "that crippled son of a bitch that killed my son Joe."
(Joe Kennedy, Jr., of course, being the ambassador's eldest son. It was Joe, Jr.'s death that ultimately laid the groundwork for the second son, John, to be groomed for the presidency in his older brother's place.)
A BUSINESS VENTURE
In fact, as we shall see, it may have been efforts by Hooker, as a consequence of his meeting with Joe Kennedy, that helped John F. Kennedy win his narrow victory in the 1960 presidential election.
Mr. Hooker hoped to interest Joe Kennedy in a business venture which Hooker believed might be right up the ambassador's alley. Hooker wanted to establish an independent television network, and he felt that Kennedy, himself a veteran movie mogul, might be interested in backing the enterprise. Hooker's memory of that meeting is quite interesting, particularly in the context of the thesis presented in these pages. To appreciate just precisely where Hooker was coming from, however, it is appropriate to review Hooker's remarkable background.
UNABASHEDLY ANTI-JEWISH
Born to wealth and privilege and a descendant of one of the signers of
the Declaration of Independence, Hooker had a varied career. Not only did he
act on the Broadway stage, but he also modeled in cigarette advertisements.
Hooker also served for a period as a talent agent with the powerful firm MCA and was, at a time during the 1950's one of the highest-paid talent
agents in America. Hooker also dabbled in television production and was
equally successful. However, there was an aspect to Hooker's persona that made him, to say the least, persona non grata in the entertainment industry: Hooker is unabashedly and frankly anti-Jewish. He will be the first to admit it, no questions asked. A powerfully-built man, Hooker is fearless and not afraid to make his position known.
One of Hooker's protégés was George Lincoln Rockwell, founder of the American Nazi Party. In his memoirs, This Time the World, Rockwell credits Hooker as being a major influence on his thinking. In fact, Rockwell dedicated the book to Hooker, along with several others including Sen. Joseph R. McCarthy and General Douglas MacArthur. Hooker, Rockwell declared, was the one "who taught me to know the cunning and evil ways of the enemy."41 According to Rockwell, Hooker was "the nearest thing to a Nazi since the Bund." 42
The reason for Hooker's interest in establishing an independent network was highly political: Hooker wanted the new network to be totally divorced from Jewish money and influence. In his judgment, the three existing networks were entirely under the control of Jewish interests. Hooker wanted a network that presented what he called "our way of thinking."
JOE KENNEDY SPEAKS FRANKLY
It was in 1956 that Hooker had a private meeting in Palm Beach,
Florida with Kennedy. After a game of golf, Kennedy and Hooker got down
to business. Hooker was there to solicit Kennedy's financial, political and
personal backing for his proposed network. (It was during this period that Sen. John F. Kennedy was then actively seeking the Democratic Party's vice presidential nomination. He lost, but his efforts brought him widespread acclaim within party ranks, and set in place the mechanism for his successful bid for the top spot on the party's national ticket in 1960.)
After Hooker made his presentation to the retired ambassador, Kennedy's response was supportive in spirit, but Old Joe made his final position clear during their four-hour conference.
According to Hooker, "Joe admitted that when he was ambassador to England that he had been pro-Hitler. However, in Kennedy's words, 'we' lost the war. By 'we' he didn't mean the United States. When Kennedy said `we,' he meant the non-Jews. Joe Kennedy believed that it was the Jews who had won World War II.
"Kennedy said, 'I've done everything I can to fight the Jewish power over this country. I tried to stop World War II, but I failed. I've made all the money I need and now I'm passing everything I've learned on to my sons."
“I don't go with the 'loser'," Kennedy told me. 'I've joined the `winners.' I'm going to work with the Jews. I'm teaching my boys the whole score and they're going to work with the Jews. I'm going to make Jack the first Irish Catholic President of the United States and if it means working with the Jews, so be it. I'm in sympathy with what you're doing, Hooker'," Kennedy said, 'but I'm not going to do anything that will ruin Jack's chances to become president."' 43
Hooker was, of course, disappointed by Kennedy's response and ultimately his "fourth" network failed to get off the ground. However, Hooker at least had the satisfaction of knowing that he and the Kennedy family were on the same wavelength—even if they were willing to compromise those views for political gain.
THE NAZIS 'ENDORSE' NIXON
As they parted at the end of their Palm Beach meeting, Hooker asked
Kennedy if there was anything he could do to help the Kennedy family. "Yes, as a matter of fact, there is something you can do." responded Joe Kennedy. "I'd like you to use your contacts in the right-wing. Have them start publishing articles accusing Jack of being controlled by the Jews, of being a Jewish puppet. This will have the effect of neutralizing Jewish opposition to Jack (because of me).
"The Jews know my views and naturally they'll assume that Jack is a chip off the old block. If the right wing starts hitting Jack this will give the Jews second thoughts—at least the ones who do the voting." 44
Hooker promised Kennedy he would do what he could. And being a man of his word, Hooker did influence his right-wing contacts as Kennedy had asked. Hooker encouraged his friend, Nazi leader Rockwell, and other "right wingers" to smear John F. Kennedy as JFK's father had suggested. His efforts succeed.
As one chronicle of the 1960 campaign noted: "The American Nazi Party helped too by throwing its support to Richard Nixon—"Nazis for Nixon, Kikes for Kennedy" was one of its slogans. Another of its placards read, "FDR and JFK mean JEW deal."45
This, of course, was inspired by JFK's father and carried out through the good offices of DeWest Hooker and his friend George Lincoln Rockwell, although the historian who penned the description of Rockwell's sloganeering probably had no idea that it was indirectly the work of Joe Kennedy.
"Frankly," Hooker says to this day, "As far as I'm concerned, it was my work that got Johnny Kennedy in the White House."46 (Hooker's claim is not completely off the mark, inasmuch as American Jewish leaders claimed themselves at the time that it was Jewish support for John F. Kennedy that gave him his narrow victory over Nixon in the 1960 election.)
This interesting—and revealing—episode is not likely to be memorialized at the John F. Kennedy Library at Harvard or in any friendly biographies of the Kennedy family. However, there can be little doubt that Israel and its American lobby had a fairly good idea of what was going on behind the scenes.
KENNEDY RILES THE ISRAELI LOBBY
In 1957, while serving in his first Senate term, John Kennedy became
involved in a festering international issue that was little noticed among the
average American voters, but which was of special interest to Israel and its
lobby in America: the question of Algerian independence. The giant Arab
colossus, long a French colony, was seeking its freedom and in France itself
the nation was engaged in a heated debate over the question. Israel, of
course, saw the emergence of another independent Arab republic as a threat
to its security and anyone favoring Algerian independence was, thus,
advocating a policy deemed threatening to Israel's survival. Former diplomat Richard Curtiss described Kennedy's surprise entry into the debate over Algeria: "By 1957, as a freshman member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he thought he recognized [the] tragedy of colonial inflexibility unfolding in Algeria. Already one of the congressional library's heaviest borrowers, he now spent additional time in conversation with William J. Porter, an Arabist and the director of the State Department's Office of North African Affairs.
"Porter feared that Washington's uncritical support of its NATO ally, France, in the increasingly brutal French repression of the Algerian nationalists, threatened the whole future of the United States in North Africa. Kennedy also talked to members of the Algerian FLN delegation at the United Nations." 47
On July 2, 1957, JFK rose before the Senate and gave his maiden foreign policy address on this controversial question. He said, in part: "No amount of mutual politeness, wishful thinking, nostalgia or regret should blind either France or the United States to the fact that, if France and the West at large are to have a continuing influence in North Africa . . . the essential first step is the independence of Algeria." 48
According to Curtiss: "The speech prompted more mail than any other he delivered as a senator. The foreign policy establishment in New York, a bastion of Atlantic solidarity, expressed righteous indignation." 49 Also, notes Curtiss, "the French were irritated."50
Some of Kennedy's critics said that the speech was a political move and that he chose the topic of Algerian independence as the subject of his first major foreign policy address because there was neither a "French" vote nor an "Algerian" vote to contend with in his home state of Massachusetts or in the nation as a whole.
While the latter observation is correct, of course, the fact is that there was one particularly powerful American voting bloc (and source of financial contributions) that did take note of Kennedy's support for Algerian Arab independence: the powerful American lobby for Israel.
As we shall see, in the end, it may have been JFK's initiative on the Algerian question that, in fact, played a major part in shaping the entirety of the conspiracy that ended his life in Dallas, Texas on November 22, 1963.
This gesture by the young senator also angered many French nationalists who wanted to retain French colonial control of Algeria. Many of these nationalists later banded together in the so-called Secret Army Organization—the Israel-backed OAS—and fought against French President Charles DeGaulle who ultimately granted Algerian independence.
In Chapter 12, Chapter 15 and Chapter 16 we will learn more about the so called "French connection" and how, indeed, it ultimately played a role in the JFK murder, manipulated by Israel's Mossad.
KENNEDY AND LANSKY
According to JFK assassination expert, Jim Marrs: "In 1927, a shipment of bootleg whiskey on its way from Ireland to Boston was hijacked in southern New England. Almost the entire guard was killed in the resulting shootout. The hijackers were part of the Luciano-Lansky mob, while it was rumored that Joseph P. Kennedy was involved in the shipment. Kennedy reputedly lost a fortune on the deal and was besieged by widows of the guards seeking financial assistance. Lansky later told biographers he was convinced that Kennedy held a grudge against him personally from that time on and, in fact, had passed the hostility on to his sons."51
Long-time Lansky henchman Michael Milan lends support for Marrs’ allegation. According to Milan, "Ask Meyer Lansky about Joe Kennedy and you'd see one of the few times that Mr. L. would actually get conniptions. What they said back during Prohibition was that you can't trust Joe Kennedy to keep his word. He stole from his friends so much that he had no friends. And right before World War II, the sonovabitch turned around and said that we should all get on Hitler's side, that the Jews could go to Hell.
"Meyer was ready to bust a blood vessel. His temples were actually throbbing when Sam Koenig told him what Kennedy had said. And then Meyer, almost like he was a born Sicilian, swore a blood revenge on the entire family. 'The sins of the father,' he kept on saying to himself, mumbling like an old zeydah vowing revenge. ‘The sins of the father.’”52
The conflict between Lansky and Joseph P. Kennedy was but one facet of Kennedy's relationship with organized crime. It was a relationship of many parts, and, in the end, clearly had a significant role in helping shape the conspiracy that resulted in the assassination of Ambassador Kennedy's son who had, in fact, finally achieved the presidency.
A DOUBLE CROSS
Commenting on the theory that organized crime killed JFK (a theory
with which Fox concurs), historian Stephen Fox noted that "Gangsters did
not normally harm honest lawmen," 53 such as a president like Kennedy whose administration had begun cracking down on the national crime
syndicate. However, notes Fox, "For such an extraordinary murder—to kill a president—they must have been extraordinarily provoked. In their terms, it could only have involved a double cross. The Kennedys must have dealt with the underworld in compromising ways. When the Kennedys then turned around and nonetheless went after organized crime, they breached the code and put a contract on the President." 54
Fox notes that while old Joe Kennedy was an inveterate gambler, with many ties to the underworld, "given his vast wealth, no matter how much he lost the underworld could never have 'owned' him."55
Joe Kennedy himself was a regular visitor to Meyer Lansky's Colonial Inn, which Lansky co-owned with New York Mafia boss Frank Costello and an assortment of smaller shareholders including a little-known Dallas nightclub keeper named Jack Ruby. Lansky himself used to brag that among his clients included, "judges, senators, respectable businessmen. Joe Kennedy used to come four or five times a week."56
However, as the senior Kennedy's son Jack moved upward in the political arena, his father tried to shut out his past relationship with Frank Costello. According to one of Costello's friends, "The way Costello talked about Joe Kennedy, you had the sense that they were close during Prohibition and then something happened. Frank said that he helped Kennedy become wealthy. What happened between them I don't know." 57
KENNEDY AND CRIME
It took the family of Chicago Mafia boss Sam Giancana to fill in the
missing pieces of the puzzle. According to Sam Giancana (nephew of the
Windy City mobster) and Chuck Giancana (brother of the mobster), JFK—
and his father—had indeed double crossed organized crime. According to the Giancanas, Detroit's "Jewish Mafia," the so-called "Purple Gang" had put out a contract on Joe Kennedy's life for bringing illegal liquor through their territory without their permission during the Prohibition days. However, Kennedy Sr. had gone to Chicago to beg for his life and the Chicago Mafia bosses intervened on his behalf, saving his life. As the Giancanas put it: "Ever after, Kennedy was in Chicago's debt." 58
The relationship went much deeper, however. According to the Giancanas: "Kennedy's ties to the underworld intersected at a hundred points. Besides making a fortune in bootlegging, Kennedy had made a financial killing in Hollywood in the twenties—with the help of persuasive behindthe-scenes New York and Chicago muscle.
"When Prohibition came to a close, as part of a national agreement between the various bootleggers, Kennedy held on to three of the most lucrative booze distributorships in the country—Gordon's gin, Dewar's, and Haig & Haig—through his company, Somerset Imports." 59
The Giancanas also say that it was Sam Giancana who smoothed things over with Frank Costello on Joe Kennedy's behalf after Ambassador Kennedy had snubbed the New York mobster. According to the Giancanas, Kennedy was concerned about his son's burgeoning political career and it was at that point that he agreed to cut a deal with organized crime in order to ensure smooth sailing—and in order to get Frank Costello, in Kennedy's words, "off my back." 60
A PROMISE TO THE MOB
After Joe Kennedy begged for Giancana's assistance at a meeting in
Chicago, Giancana reportedly said, "I've heard nothing today that leads me
to think that you can promise me anything in return for my assistance."
Kennedy responded: "I can. And I will. You help me now, Sam, and I'll see
to it that Chicago—that you—can sit in the godamned Oval office if you
want. That you'll have the President's ear. But I just need time."
Kennedy told Giancana, "He'll be your man. I swear to that. My son—
the President of the United States—will owe you his father's life. He won't
refuse you, ever. You have my word." 61
JFK, THE MAFIA AND MEYER LANSKY
It was during the 1960 Democratic Presidential primary campaign that the
Kennedys once again turned to Giancana for critical Mafia support. In fact,
according to the Giancanas, the Kennedys—father and son—actually met
with Sam Giancana to work out a joint agreement of mutual support, before—
and after—the election. As Giancana summarized the agreement: "I help get
Jack elected and, in return, he calls off the heat. It'll be business as usual." 62 Mafia money poured into critical primary states such as West Virginia (where many local political leaders were on the Mafia "pad") and by convention time, JFK was virtually assured the presidential nomination. Although New Orleans Mafia boss Carlos Marcello preferred Texas Senator Lyndon Johnson, an agreement was cut, and a Kennedy-Johnson ticket was set in place. The Democratic ticket was ready for the fall election.63
(In Chapter 10 we shall explore the relationship between Carlos Marcello and Meyer Lansky in detail. Marcello, in fact, was a protégé of Lansky—his New Orleans front man, pure and simple.)
It turns out, too, that JFK himself was busy with other mob figures other than Sam Giancana, although the history books have discreetly ignored JFK's other crime connections, preferring instead to focus on the Italian-American "Mafia" figures.
According to FBI documents and wiretaps, JFK himself had "direct contact"64 with Meyer Lansky himself during the 1960 presidential campaign, presumably for the purpose of shoring up mob support for his presidential campaign—a pact that would ultimately prove to have been a proverbial deal with the devil.
PROBLEMS WITH THE ISRAELI LOBBY
During this same period JFK was also engaged with critical negotiations
with another important power bloc in American political affairs: the proIsrael
lobby. For obvious reasons, as we have seen, there was indeed no
love lost between JFK, his father, Ambassador Kennedy, and the American
Jewish community. Writing in his book, The Lobby: Jewish Political Power and American Foreign Policy, Edward Tivnan comments: "Senator Kennedy's record on Israel was vague, certainly not as staunchly supportive as Hubert Humphrey's. And unlike Lyndon Johnson, Kennedy did not rush to Israel's defense during the Suez affair.
"He was also a Catholic. Many Jews associated American Catholics with right-wing, pro-McCarthy, and anti-Semitic causes. Worse, there was the touchy issue of the candidate's father, Joseph P. Kennedy, who, as ambassador to Great Britain in the late 1930's, had been a supporter of Neville Chamberlain's policy of appeasing the Nazis." 65
Kennedy's 1957 speech calling for Algerian independence, as we have seen, had not gone over well with Israel's American supporters. Angering the Israeli lobby further, Senator Kennedy had once offered an amendment that would have slashed economic assistance to Africa and the Middle East from $175 to $140 million, this despite the fact that pro-Israel senators said that this was harmful to Israel. 66
ABRAHAM FEINBERG
Kennedy's contact with the Israeli lobby was New York apparel manufacturer and financier, Abraham Feinberg. Feinberg was president of the Israel Bond Organization and was helping raise private money to finance Israel's secret nuclear development program.
(The financing was done through private, covert means and outside the normal Israeli budget process because the nuclear development program was controversial, in the eyes of not only the Eisenhower administration in Washington but also in the eyes of many Israelis.)
Referring to Kennedy, Feinberg later said, "My path to power was cooperation in terms of what they needed—campaign money." 68 (Feinberg, himself had previously supported JFK's fellow Senator Stuart Symington, a rival for the 1960 Democratic nomination.)
Recognizing the need for not only critical Jewish money, but also Jewish votes, Kennedy arranged to meet with Feinberg and a host of other wealthy Jewish Americans in Feinberg's New York apartment. Following a discussion with Kennedy, Feinberg and his associates agreed to come up with $500,000 on Kennedy's behalf. According to Feinberg: "I called him right away. His voice broke. He got emotional" with gratitude.69
KENNEDY'S 'OUTRAGE'
However, there was much more to the story according to author
Seymour Hersh who has investigated Kennedy's relations with Israel and its
American lobby: Kennedy was anything but grateful the next morning in describing the session to Charles L. Bartlett, a newspaper columnist and close friend. He had driven to Bartlett's home in northwest Washington and dragged his friend on a walk, where he recounted a much different version of the meeting the night before.
"`As an American citizen he was outraged," Bartlett recalled, "to have a Zionist group come to him and say: 'We know your campaign is in trouble. We're willing to pay your bills if you'll let us have control of your Middle East policy.' Kennedy, as a presidential candidate, also resented the crudity with which he'd been approached. `They wanted control.' he angrily told Bartlett.
"Bartlett further recalled Kennedy promising to himself that `if he ever did get to be President, he was going to do something about it.'" 70—that is, special interest lobbies—particularly foreign pressure groups—dictating American election campaigns and foreign policy through their financial and political clout.
PARTIALITY 'DANGEROUS'
In a private letter to Jewish American historian Alfred Lilienthal,
himself a vocal critic of Israel, Kennedy did, however, reveal his feelings
toward the Middle East conflict. The letter, written on September 30, 1960,
read in part: "I wholly agree with you that American partiality in the Arab/Israeli
conflict is dangerous both to the U.S. and the Free World" 71 In
Lilienthal's judgment, Kennedy's comment was "one of the most significant
and perspicacious Middle East statements" ever made by any American
political figure. 72 But Kennedy had already cut his deals. Not only organized crime—but the Israeli lobby (of which Meyer Lansky was a critical supporter)—had their claims on John F. Kennedy.
After the election, they expected Kennedy to pay up. In the general election, it was a narrow Kennedy victory over the Republican candidate, Vice President Richard M. Nixon.
The role of the Chicago Democratic political machine (under the thumb of Mafia boss Sam Giancana) in stealing Illinois votes on behalf of the Kennedy-Johnson ticket is now well known and a widely accepted part of American political history.
Sam Giancana and his allies in organized crime—including Meyer Lansky and the Israeli lobby—were confident that they had themselves a president.
KENNEDY & BEN-GURION
THE FIRST ENCOUNTER
Shortly after his inauguration as president, Kennedy arranged to meet
with Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion. At this meeting, Kennedy
said, "I know I was elected because of the votes of American Jews. I owe
them my election. Tell me, is there something that I can do for the Jewish
people?" According to Seymour Hersh, "Ben-Gurion was surprised by the frankness and evaded the question by answering, 'You must do what is best for the free world."' However, Ben-Gurion's real reaction to Kennedy was somewhat different. “What a politician!" is how the Israeli leader described the American leader. 73
It was the beginning of a bitter and unpleasant relationship between the two men that came to its finish in Dallas, Texas on November 22, 1963. (In Chapter 5 we will examine that unfortunate relationship in detail.)
KENNEDY TURNS THE TABLES
It was not much longer afterward that Kennedy's organized crime friends
began to realize that Kennedy was not proving to be the loyal ally that they
had expected he would be. Soon after JFK assumed the presidency, an
unexpected war on organized crime began. Robert Kennedy, who had cut his
teeth prosecuting mobsters as a counsel for the Senate's "rackets
committee," was named attorney general and it was apparent that he was
taking his new job seriously. According to Sam Giancana, "It's a brilliant move on Joe [Kennedy]'s part. He'll have Bobby wipe us out to cover their own dirty tracks and it'll all be done in the name of the Kennedy 'war on organized crime.' Brilliant. Just fuckin' brilliant." 74
Meyer Lansky's West Coast henchman, Mickey Cohen, reflected in later years upon the Organized Crime-Kennedy alliance and what it meant, particularly after Bobby Kennedy launched his campaign against the underworld.
"I know that certain people in the Chicago organization knew that they had to get John Kennedy in. There was no thought that they were going to get the best of it with John Kennedy. See, there may be different guys running for an office, and none of them may be . . . what's best for a combination.
"The choice becomes the best of what you've got going. John Kennedy was the best of the selection. But nobody in my line of work had an idea that he was going to name Bobby Kennedy attorney general. That was the last thing anyone thought." 75
(In Chapter 13 and Chapter 14 we shall examine Cohen's own strange and critical role in the JFK assassination conspiracy and its ultimate cover up—yet another piece of the puzzle brought together in these pages.) Ultimately, as we shall see, JFK's war against his former allies in the underworld, would lead him to the very doorsteps of the real brains behind the national—and international—crime syndicate, Meyer Lansky. However, he had already double-crossed his immediate underworld collaborators. That alone was enough to spell JFK's doom.
JFK MOVES AGAINST THE ISRAELI LOBBY
However, Kennedy was also engaged in some legislative sleight-of-hand
that could also prove dangerous to Israel's political leverage in American
election politics. Angry at his campaign experiences with the Israeli lobby's
fundraisers, Kennedy appointed a bipartisan commission in 1961 to
recommend ways to broaden "the financial base of our presidential
campaigns." 76 According to Seymour Hersh, "In a statement that was far more heartfelt than the public or the press could perceive, [Kennedy] criticized the current method of financing campaigns as 'highly undesirable' and 'not healthy' because it made candidates `dependent on large financial contributions of those with special interests.'" 77
In 1962 Kennedy submitted five bills to reform campaign financing to Congress and in 1963 two more such bills. But none of those bills survived, having been beaten back by the very special interests that Kennedy sought to counter. 78
SECRET WARS
However, Kennedy was more deeply engaged with Israel than on this more subtle level. As we shall see in Chapter 5, Kennedy, in fact, was at war with Israel. Not only had Kennedy double-crossed his allies in organized crime, but he had crossed his pro-Israel financiers. Israel, as we shall see in Chapter 7, was long close to the Meyer Lansky Organized Crime Syndicate.
And Israel, as we shall see in Chapter 8, was particularly close to the American CIA. Kennedy, too, by the middle of his presidency, was also at war with the CIA. This we shall discuss in Chapter 9.
All of these powerful special interests had very special reasons to want to see JFK removed from the presidency and replaced with Lyndon Johnson. There was clearly no love lost between John F. Kennedy and the powerful forces which had helped bring him to the presidency.
A reform-minded President Kennedy also had other long-range plans in the works. The scion of an independent and essentially self-made man who "played the game" to gain power and influence—and to get his son elected president—JFK was indeed very much his father's son. As a consequence, in another important realm, JFK was moving in a direction that could rock the international banking establishment to its core.
There have been widespread rumors, for nearly a generation, that JFK was planning to issue interest-free money—so-called "greenbacks"— independent of the stranglehold of the privately-owned Federal Reserve System. In fact, interest-free United States Notes were issued during JFK's presidency—some remain in private hands today—but there have been many myths about what some have called "JFK's Greenbacks" and in Appendix Five we will examine this controversy in detail.
THE MONEY MONOPOLY
There is no question, however, but that JFK—once firmly established
in the presidency—fully intended to move against the Federal Reserve
money monopoly. In fact, during his private meeting with DeWest Hooker,
described earlier in these pages, JFK's father, Ambassador Joseph P.
Kennedy assured Hooker that an ultimate long-term aim of the Kennedy
dynasty would be the destruction of what the senior Kennedy described as
"the Rothschild-dominated Federal Reserve." This alone could have assured JFK's removal from the White House. However, there were other more immediate and ultimately dangerous conflicts at work between the forces whose influence JFK sought to dismantle and the hard-driving new Kennedy administration.
DIVERSE ENTITIES
Let us move forward and examine the strange and intimate connections
between all of these Kennedy foes and the dynamics at work between them.
However, as we shall see, it is the central thread of Israel and its Mossad
that ties all of these diverse entities together. To begin the process of untangling this hidden web of intrigue, we must first review the long-hidden story of Israel's secret war with John F. Kennedy
NEXT....
Genesis: JFK's Secret War With Israel
PART 3http://stillchillinonhistory.blogspot.com/2016/11/part-3-final-judgmentgenesis-jfks.html
Footnotes
Chapter Two Off With His Head
8 Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, February 1992.
9 Ibid.
10 Ibid.
12 Ibid.
13 Ibid
14 Ibid
15 Washington Times, January 14, 1992.
16 Ibid.
17 Jim Mans. Crossfire: The Plot That Killed Kennedy. (New York: Carroll & Graf Publishers, Inc., 1989), p. 582.
18 Victor Ostrovsky. The Other Side of Deception. New York: HarperCollins, 1994, pp. 277-279.
19 Richard Curtiss. A Changing Image. (Washington, DC: American Educational Trust, 1986), p. 24.
20 Ibid.
21 John Loftus and Mark Aarons. The Secret War Against the Jews. (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1994), p. 154.
22 Margaret Truman. Harry S. Truman. (New York: William Morrow & Company, Inc. 1973), p. 489.
Chapter Three A Bad Habit
23 Tikkun, March/April 1992.
24 Ibid
25 Livia Rokach. Israel's Sacred Terrorism. (Belmont, Massachusetts: AAUG Press, 1986), p. 34. 556 26 Spotlight, September 6, 1982.
27 The Spotlight, November 10, 1980
28 Ibid.
29 Jonathan Marshall, Peter Dale Scott and Jane Hunter. The Iran-Contra Connection: Secret Teams and Covert Operations in the Reagan Era. (Boston, Massachusetts: South End Press, 1987), p. 217.
30 Ibid.
31 The Spotlight, April 21, 1986.
32 The Spotlight., November 10, 1986
33 Ibid.
33 Ibid.
34 Ibid.
35 Ibid., September 27, 1982.
Chapter Four No Love Lost
36 Granma, November 4, 1979.
37 C. David Heymann, A Woman Named Jackie. (New York: New American Library, 1989), p. 151.
38 Ibid.
39 Time, October 19, 1992., p. 28.
40 Richard Whalen. The Founding Father: The Story of Joseph P. Kennedy. (New York: New American Library, 1964), pp. 366-367.
41 George Lincoln Rockwell. This Time the World. (Liverpool, West Virginia: White Power Publications, 1963), p. v.
42 Ibid., p. 123.
43 Interview with DeWest Hooker, January 20, 1992.
44 Ibid.
45 Edward Tivnan. The Lobby: Jewish Political Power and American Foreign Policy. (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1987), p. 54.
46 Interview with De West Hooker.
47 Richard Curtiss. A Changing Image. [Washington, D.C.: American Educational Trust, 1986), p. 65.
48 Ibid.
49 Ibid., p. 66.
50 Ibid.
51 Jim Marrs. Crossfire: The Plot That Killed Kennedy. (New York: Carroll & Graf Publishers, Inc., 1989), p. 175.
52 Michael Milan. The Squad: The U.S. Government's Secret Alliance With Organized Crime. [New York: Shapolski Publishers, 1989], p. 166.
53 Stephen Fox. Blood and Power: Organized Crime in Twentieth Century America. (New York: William Morrow & Company, 1989), p. 307.
54 Ibid.
55 Ibid., pp. 313-314.
56 Ibid., p. 314. [460] Final Judgment 557
57 Ibid., p. 315.
58 Sam Giancana and Chuck Giancana. Double Cross. (New York: Warner Books, 1992), p. 75.
59 Ibid., p. 227.
60 Ibid., p. 229.
61 Ibid., p. 230.
62 Ibid., p. 280.
63 Ibid., p. 284
64 Heymann, p. 234.
65 Tivnan, p. 52.
66 Victor Lasky. JFK: The Man & The Myth. (New Rochelle, New York, 1966), p. 143.
67 Tivnan, Ibid.
68 Seymour M. Hersh. The Samson Option: Israel's Nuclear Arsenal and American Foreign Policy. (New York: Random House, 1991), p. 94.
69 Ibid., p. 96.
70 Ibid., p. 97.
71 Alfred M. Lilienthal. The Zionist Connection II. (New Brunswick, New Jersey: North American, 1982), p. 548.
72 Ibid.
73 Hersh, p. 103.
74 Giancana, p. 296.
75 Mickey Cohen with John Peer Nugent. Mickey Cohen: In My Own Words. (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1975), p. 236.
76 Hersh, p. 97.
77 Ibid.
78 Ibid
No comments:
Post a Comment