There have been indications since November the 22nd of 1963--and that was not the last indication--that there is excessive power in some parts of our government. It is plain that the people have not received all of the truth about some of the things which have happened, about some of the assassinations which have occurred--and more particularly about the assassination of John Kennedy.
[...]
The government's handling of the investigation of John Kennedy's murder was a fraud. It was the greatest fraud in the history of our country. It probably was the greatest fraud ever perpetrated in the history of humankind. That doesn't mean that we have to accept the continued existence of the kind of government which allows this to happen. We can do something about it. We're forced either to leave this country or to accept the authoritarianism that has developed--the authoritarianism which tells us that in the year 2029 we can see the evidence about what happened to John Kennedy.
Government does not consist only of secret police and domestic espionage operations and generals and admirals--government consists of people. It also consists of juries. And cases of murder--whether of the poorest individual or the most distinguished citizen in the land--should be looked at openly in a court of law, where juries can pass on them and not be hidden, not be buried like the body of the victim beneath concrete for countless years.
You men in these recent weeks have heard witnesses that no one else in the world has heard. You've seen the Zapruder film. You've seen what happened to your President. I suggest to you that you know right now that, in that area at least, a fraud has been perpetrated.
That does not mean that our government is entirely bad; and I want to emphasize that. It does mean, however, that in recent years, through the development of excessive power because of the Cold War, forces have developed in our government over which there is no control and these forces have an authoritarian approach to justice--meaning, they will let you know what justice is.
Well, my reply to them is that we already know what justice is. It is the decision of the people passing on the evidence. It is the jury system. In this issue which is posed by the government's conduct in concealing the evidence in this case--in the issue of humanity as opposed to power--I have chosen humanity, and I will do it again without any hesitation. I hope every one of you will do the same. I do this because I love my country and because I want to communicate to the government that we will not accept unexplained assassinations with the casual information that if we live seventy-five years longer, we might be given more evidence.
In this particular case, massive power was brought to bear to prevent justice from ever coming into this courtroom. The power to make authoritive pronouncements, the power to manipulate the news media by the release of false information, the power to interfere with an honest inquiry and the power to provide an endless variety of experts to testify in behalf of power, repeatedly was demonstrated in this case.
The American people have yet to see the Zapruder film. Why? The American people have yet to see and hear from the real witnesses to the assassination. Why? Because, today in America too much emphasis is given to secrecy, with regard to the assassination of our President, and not enough emphasis is given to the question of justice and to the question of humanity.
These dignified deceptions will not suffice. We have had enough of power without truth. We don't have to accept power without truth or else leave the country. I don't accept either of these two alternatives. I don't intend to leave the country and I don't intend to accept power without truth.
I intend to fight for the truth. I suggest that not only is this not un-American, but it is the most American thing we can do--because if the truth does not endure, then our country will not endure.
In our country the worst of all crimes occurs when the government murders truth. If it can murder truth, it can murder freedom. If it can murder freedom, it can murder your own sons--if they should dare to fight for freedom-- and then it can announce that they were killed in an industrial accident, or shot by the "enemy" or God knows what.
That was a portion of NOLA District Attorney Jim Garrison's closing summation in his case against Clay Shaw who was charged with conspiracy in the assassination of John F Kennedy. Mr Shaw was not found guilty as a result of that trial, but the message of Mr Garrison some 40 years ago that the American government was so mired in secrecy and power that it would hide the truth of the most grievous occurances of the time - the assasinations of John Kennedy, Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr, while expecting the stupified public to believe that they were killed by a succession of lone gunmen: Lee Harvey Oswald, Sirhan Sirhan and James Earl Ray, is a stark reminder that we simply don't know what we don't know. Too many people, although suspicious, continue to believe that they cannot be manipulated by their government and thrive on the false hope that so-called conspiracy theories are fictitious nonsense.
As we approach the fifth anniversary of 9/11, Sunday's New York Times has an article informing the public that 2 new reports have been released in order to debunk 9/11 conspiracy theories: one written by the State Department's Orwellian 'counter misinformation team' and the other by the government's National Institute of Standards and Technology. Anyone who would take these government produced reports as the final word on the truth of what happened on 9/11 must also believe that those lone gunmen assassins acted alone and that Arlen Specter's magic bullet theory about the Kennedy assasination was true.
There are many questions surrounding what happened on 9/11 but the one that most interests me is why 28 pages related to Saudi Arabia were blacked out when the commission released its final report. What are those in power hiding? Along with that, why hasn't Osama bin Laden been formally charged? When asked about the fact that bin Laden's FBI 'Most Wanted' listing didn't include any charges related to 9/11, the response recently given to the Washington Post was this:
"There's no mystery here," said FBI spokesman Rex Tomb. "They could add 9/11 on there, but they have not because they don't need to at this point. . . . There is a logic to it."
What kind of 'logic' might that be and why didn't Rex Tomb tell the WaPo reporters what he reportedly admitted to the Muckracker's Ed Haas? That the FBI 'has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11'?
It's not my intention through this post to investigate all of the aspects surrounding coverups by corrupt American governments that we are all too familiar with. That's been done by several people with far more access and information throughout the years than I can claim to possess. All anyone needs to do is to connect the dots between the Bushes> Texas oilmen > the Saudis > the CIA > The FBI> Nixon > Johnson >KBR > Bechtel >Halliburton > Lockheed-Martin> the military-industrial complex> underground arms sales > military coups and on and on. That, in itself, can take a lifetime to begin to unravel.
So, I return to my main point: we don't know what we don't know. And, further, we cannot count on those who claim to have our best interests at heart to actually inform us any time soon because they believe the truth is something that citizens must be protected from.
Just as Adam and Eve angered God when Eve ate forbidden fruit from the Tree of Knowledge, according to the bible, the new self-selected proponents of the Religion of Terror: the Father (Dick Cheney), the Son (George Bush) and the Holy Ghost (Karl Rove) also propagate the belief that knowledge is dangerous and that if we were to indulge in the forbidden truth, we would also become too keenly aware of our own nakedness (naivete) and would thus become horrified - left to wander through life in toil rather than receiving God's grace of perfection as a gift. The new Trinity must not be disobeyed.
Today's sinners have been relabeled by the new false prophets as traitors, fascists and communists who are committing acts of treason against the ultimate powers that be and, because they are evil, they must be made to suffer for it. This is the subtlety underlying the recent chorus of Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld speeches that has so outraged the populous who have been offended by these strong charges and which has comforted the true believers (the right-wingers who choose to obey their masters, no matter what).
George Bush was right: there is a clash of civilizations. But, it's not between the west and radical Islam. It's an internal clash in North America between those who fight for the truth and those who continue to suppress it in the name of power - the true authoritarian fascists.
The real war of this time is the War on Truth. Have we advanced in our fight any more than where we all were when Jim Garrison gave his closing argument almost 40 years ago? More importantly, are we still willing to honour his legacy and those whose lives were taken from us - those who led the battle of our time for peace and civil rights? John Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr. - victims of a vicious secret machine that still lives and breaths in Washington today. We believe we deserve the truth. Just how much are we willing to risk in order to get it?
No comments:
Post a Comment