To: Bill Kelly <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: [Fwd: Article from The Nation]
Date: Sunday, March 11, 2001 11:20 PM
A classic piece of slimy disinformation from the boys at The Nation, who
now it seems include Gus Russo. They are harder at work finding "proof"
that JFK or RFK wanted to kill Castro than finding out who succeeded in
killing them. First notice that the source is a note taken by Lansdale,
who had his own reasons to try to lend Presidential cover to his
skullduggery. Second note that the text does not at all clearly say what
they try to make it say with other references. Then note that ALL of
their positive sources are Mongoose, CIA and such scum for putting the
blame on JFK and RFK. Gus Russo has been doing the CIA's laundry for
several years now. Corn is at the same level of stupidity and conceit as
their other great JFK scholar Max Holland. This piece of tripe can get
in but real information on who killed them cannot, not even a letter,
though this deserves one.
ps - I still contend that Operation Mongoose had NO intention of killing
Castro but was a cover for domestic assassination here. I just read an
interview where Jim Garrison began to lean that way, seeing a dual
purpose to it. But, it's more fun to think that all Presidents are
killers, instead of realizing JFK was killed for refusing to. Let's
throw in the rest of the Eisenhower/Nixon plots as well, and blame JFK
for Lamumba and Diem while we're at it. Now then, they had it coming,
didn't they? OK, go back to sleep America.
Gus Russo appeared in the late 80's claiming to be a JFK assassination
researcher, and tapped many unsuspecting folks for information (I was
always wary of him), then showed his true colors at a symposium in
Chicago where he openly became an apologist for the Warren Commission
version. Others in the research community kept dealing with him though.
At the inception of COPA in 1994, we got word from some of them that Gus
was lunching with the likes of Helms, Colby, etc. and that they were
probing him about the first COPA national conference and whether we were
going to blame their friend David Atlee Phillips for the murder. He was
flattered to be among them, and clearly bought their line. "They call me
Gus" he happily told one researcher. We had other names for him, of
He was hired as a consultant for a History Channel series about Oswald,
and he does keep exhaustive files. Of course the program came to the
same conclusion, Oswald was a skill-less malcontent who shot the
Russo wrote a book based on what the intelligence boys fed him (look
again at the Nation piece sources for the interpretation that this is an
assassination plot, even an unnamed CIA source - who needs the fucking
New York Times, now the Nation can use the same smarmy "journalism"
instead). It was originally titled Reap the Whirlwind. This is the
There was no rogue element in the CIA or Mongoose, they were just
following orders from JFK to kill Castro.
The old hands at the CIA were not comfortable with these assassination
plots, but they were forced to go along by the Kennedy brothers, who
were "out of control".
The plots to kill Castro, though unsuccessful, caused the "Commie"
malcontent Oswald to kill JFK in retaliation.
The Kennedy brothers "reaped the whirlwind" of their killing plots and
were killed themselves instead. (i.e. Had it coming).
David Corn, like Max Holland and Russo, are self-conceited intellectual
arbiters from the circles around IPS (note they quote Halpern too) who
despise the left and the counter-cultural movement. (Well, hell, all you
need to do is think about your previous CAQ editor to know the fucking
mentality, Lou.) Corn slammed me in print way back when I started the
Mae Brussell Center, linking me to the paranoid right wing militia.
Holland used to sleaze into the COPA meetings with Ben Franklin of
Washington Spectator for no other purpose than to do hit pieces. No
wonder they liked him at the Nation! Holland has a book coming that
defends the Warren Commission.
They fall in line behind I.F. Stone, Alexander Cockburn, Howard Zinn,
Noam Chomsky and whatever else passes for left intellectuals in this
culture, going beyond saying that it doesn't matter if there was a
conspiracy to actually attacking those who say there was.
The Nation has suppressed this information from inception, and one has
to wonder about the money behind it, especially the proto-fascist
Hamilton Fish, Sr. They hate the counter-culture and the grassroots
left. Look at their defense of Gore and slamming of Nader during the
last election for an example.
I suggest the new book False Mystery by Vincent Salandria, a brilliant
early critic, and also History Will Not Absolve Us by Martin Schotz for
clear left analysis of the case and early indictments of The Nation.
Russo is slick, full of "facts", and hard at work performing the second
assassination of the Kennedy's, along with the CIA's old wonder boy,
Seymour Hersh. Yes, there is a "dark side" to the Kennedy saga, all you
have to do is look at the old man for that, but it was when the boys
broke free that the trouble really started. They responded to the civil
rights and anti-nuclear movements in a way no one before or after them
ever did. Not because they were saints, but because they were clear
headed politicians. Whatever "dark side" they had it has to be compared
to the "black hole" of the forces that killed them first. Once we name
the killers, then we can talk about the crimes of the victims. These
"writers" will only address the latter. It's a lot safer, and they get
to lunch with the CIA and be told the "inside story" that no one has
ever heard before (yeah, right!).
Thanks for the kind words about the Nation story. I was pleased with
the way it came out. In my opinion, the memo generates quite a bit of
smoke, as I doubt that RFK would have brought up any sort of plan to
assassinate Castro in the presence of his brother, the President, if
JFK had been sitting there with "virgin ears" that had never heard
talk of such a thing before. By implication, then, the memo shows
more knowledge on JFK's part than what he would have picked up in
that single meeting. On those other occasions, however, there was
no Lansdale present to indiscreetly record the discussions.
I'd like to hear more of your thoughts on the memo, and, for that
matter, on the Nation story.