History Lesson Open Thread

newjesustimes's picture

I was thinking about JFK and what we were taught in school. And my mind went back to something that had fascinated me at the time; a filmstrip we were shown in i believe it was 4th grade around 1978, that featured many apparently remarkable coincidences between the assassinations of Lincoln and JFK. It was written from the point of view of the official story. I believe it also noted that every president elected in a year ending in 0 had died while still in office. Why was such a film made and shown to schoolchildren? What concept was it attempting to introduce or reinforce? Strange stuff in retrospect - I'd be curious to see it again now.

One thing about history class (at least when I was in the fine American public education system) that bugged me was how we seemed to be using a curriculum written in 1955. The most interesting stuff to me was what the heck's been going on recently. But we spent weeks and months on the French and Indian war, the American revolution, Spanish American War, the Civil War, The Great War, and WWII. Then with about a week left in the school year, the teacher might ramble about the red scare and Korean conflict.

Well what about Vietnam? How did we get there, why did so many guys die there, what the hell was it all about? Maybe it was too sensitive a topic for kids to take home to their families. Or maybe we really were just using a 1950s curriculum. I've learned a lot since then. All about how Jim Morrison of the Doors's father ran into some made up trouble in the Gulf of Tonkin. Truth certainly seems far stranger than fiction.


Fiction that is truth

"Truth certainly seems far stranger than fiction."
That's because no matter what you can think of, somebody somewhere is doing it.
Now think about all the things other people are thinking of that you aren't or can't. Scary thought for the day.

And now for something completely . . . .

Okay, what's wrong with this story? Take your time, now . . .

the context

In 1976, the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) was set up to look into certain political assassinations of the previous decade. Its report was published in 1979.

The filmstrip you saw as a kid was intended to convey the impression that it is "normal" and "natural" for presidents to die in office, and perhaps more importantly that killers of presidents are "lone nuts" who have no connection to any political forces anywhere but just happen to penetrate the nation's most important security.

One of the nine men selected the to Warren Commission and responsible for its "investigation" of the death of JFK was Allen Dulles, the former head of the CIA, whom Kennedy had fired in the wake of the Bay of Pigs fiasco. (Why whould Dulles, a covert operator with an obvious grudge against Kennedy, be chosen for such a role? It's utterly mysterious, unless it's transparently obvious!)

At the first meeting of the commission, Dulles gave each of the other commissioners copies of a book about previous political assassinations, which "explained" each of them as the work of deranged loners, and he told them he believed they would find the same was true in the case of JFK. (Why whould he do such a thing? It's utterly mysterious, unless it's transparently obvious!)

You see, if it's always a lone nut with a vague and mysterious personal problem taking out his frustrations by killing a great man, then we really don't have much to worry about, or much chance to stop him. Since the lone nuts had no connections, it was really quite impossible for our national security state to have prevented their dastardly deeds. And in any case, the incoming president "always" retains the former president's advisors and "never" turns his policy agenda around, so "nothing changes" in the wakes of these assassinations, except of course for the personalities entrusted with the awesome challenge of leading this great and wonderful nation.

And if it's "normal" and "natural" for presidents to meet their deaths while in office, even in some cases extremely violent deaths, then we don't have much to worry about on that score either. You see? It's happened before; it happens every 20 years, and yet we are still here, doing fine, making our peaceful transfers of power every four (or eight) years, just as a model democracy should ... nothing to worry about, move along...

Elsewhere (where? I can't remember!) I have written about the power of pre-emptive lying. The crux of the story is this: Getting a false story out first -- before the truth can emerge -- makes a huge difference as to whether or not it will be accepted. 9/11 was the best illustration of that dynamic we have ever seen, but it's far from the only example of the same "information warfare" technique being used against "the enemy" (namely, us).

It happens all the time, it's been happening since before we were born, and the filmstrip you remember is just one little example of it. A snowflake in the blizzard, to to speak. But a very interesting one. Wasn't it?

Invaluable Comments Winter

One of the Keys to be able to decipher bullshit is extensive knowlege of subjects through reading and maybe documentary films. The mind ofcourse must be opened to the possibility that official stories might cover a much darker truth. So for folk like myself who do not read extensively its a great benefit to have people like Winter who have covered a lot of data filling in the gaps in our knowledge with the facts in an easy to understand format. This is what the media should be doing.

The terrorism spin is getting quite easy to spot though now without a whole lotta knowlege once you've read several of WP's essays. Why is it sooo easy? Because its so poorly constructed. Its almost always some planned attack they have foiled without any credible evidence to back it up.
Can't wait to see the actual evidence they offer us/manufacture against the terrorists who supposedly planned to attack an army base in OZ, when it go's to trial. So far the media reports I've seen haven't supplied any evidence whatsoever. My first reaction is "This is a terror govt/media drama story and the real victims are likely to be the accused ( no actual attack ). Its designed to win NZ and OZ support for Obama's murderous war in Afghanistan. An Obama/US favour to Rudd and Key. Gosh now it would look really bad if we didn't contribute to this vicous sham.
I'm sure Ghandi will be onto this one and would like to get his input. I imagine hes waiting to see what evidence is offered up to the unwitting public.

so then ...

This filmstrip came along in 1978, and presumably it pointed out all the inane coincidences: Kennedy's secretary was named Lincoln, and Lincoln's secretary was named Kennedy; John Wilkes Booth (the "lone nut" who allegedly killed Lincoln all by himself) and Lee Harvey Oswald (the "lone nut" who allegedly killed Kennedy all by himself) both have three words in their names, and 15 letters total; and so on. How intriguing! and so forth.

Then in 1979 the HSCA released its report in which it admitted that there was more than one shooter in Dealey Plaza at the time that JFK was shot, but it stopped short of calling it a "conspiracy". Presumably, then, Kennedy was killed by two lone nuts, who just happened to choose the same time and place to start shooting at him. And the other lone nut must have missed, at least according to the HSCA, because they left the "magic bullet theory" in place, and never revisited any of the ballistic and medical evidence, or any of the other wacky details that make it obvious that a large-scale conspiracy was afoot that day.

To give you a single instance, eyewitnesses to the assassination reported being detained by police, who confiscated their cameras and their film, and who told them "You heard three shots from the School Book Depository!" If any of the witnesses argued about the number of shots or the direction from which they had come, the police told them "If you know what's good for you, you'll keep your mouth shut!"

Why, if there were a proper murder investigation going on, would the police behave in this way? Why wouldn't they be asking the witnesses what they saw and heard, rather than telling them?? As I have mentioned above, it's utterly mysterious, unless it's transparently obvious.

The HSCA didn't care to look into any of these questions, or any other questions which might have led to the obvious conclusion that the were trying so hard to avoid. Instead they just hoped you had been paying attention to the filmstrip.

Similarly, on 9/11, government "investigators" confiscated all the security videos that could have shown what (if anything) hit the Pentagon. Then they told us what we saw. Then they didn't release the videos. So ... if the videos do indeed show what the government told us we saw, why haven't those videos been released? Could it be that they don't show what we were told we saw? Or is the government deliberately holding back evidence that would strengthen its case?

I know these are the sorts of questions only a "conspiracy theorist" would ask, but they are sitting there begging for answers, are they not?


Yes Winter Its all so very obviously transparently a conspiracy that some people must see quite clearly if they had access to the little information you have shared with us.

When are we going to get the Winter News Channel on TV smiling

I look back to my own reaction to 911 and wonder if its typical or maybe not. My memory seems to be quite poor so it might be just me. But I do remember thinking that it was not right. I recall writing supportive posts to American’s on my positive thinking blog at the time. Before I started the first post on the topic I thought "but there’s something wrong here" and there was a sick feeling in my gut. My justification was that whatever had happened, everyday Americans thought they had been attacked and they were ally’s so support was warranted. I went ahead and posted positive supportive articles anyway and thought no more about that feeling for quite a long time. In that post I went off on another tangent about terrorism ( which I knew zero about ) and became absorbed in that idea which seemed to suplant the original worry.
I didn't watch much television coverage after that and my questioning stopped. It wasn't NZ after all.
Maybe its like when you go supermarket shopping some people get in your way and don't move. They just don't see you cause they are absorbed in something else.

newjesustimes's picture

my reactions

before the towers "collapsed" I felt that this had a silver lining in that it proved that a missile defense system was a total waste of money. (Apparently the financial decision-makers didn't get the message)
After they collapsed I believed there were explosives, lots of them. I didn't suspect government involvement until George Bush said "Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories". About a year later as he first stonewalled any investigation, and later refused to testify under oath, I knew the score. Googled around and found compelling enough arguments that I became convinced enough to tell my friends and acquaintances my opinions. Some of them similarly became convinced whereas others maintain a religious faith in their government and media. I don't discuss it much any more - I feel like people who don't agree by now, don't want to know, and there's no sense pissing them off further with damned reality.

People are Starting to Listen


"I don't discuss it much any more - I feel like people who don't agree by now, don't want to know, and there's no sense pissing them off further with damned reality."
Amazing aint it just how many people "dont wanna know". I thought my family were different untill a few months ago. My mum would get really angry if I talked about such things and I thought she was unusual until I realised just how many people were exactly like her. Shes gone now and maybe she can now see much more than we can.
I have noticed recently peoples attitude have changed. They know things are not right in many ways and are much more willing to listen. I think they see their own livelyhoods/futures are now threatened by these nutters. So now might be a time to step up communications with those who are now interested.

admin's picture

Thanks Sally

It seems like the ones who don't want to know are the same crowd blaming America's current economic woes on "Obama's socialism" and the Liberal Media's worship of Obama and all things leftist. The tedium of reality is a painful anathema to them. I guess our choice is to forgive their shortcomings and try to avoid these subjects in their presence, or have nothing to do with them. I've taken both routes, depending on who they are.
Sorry to hear about your mum and hope we do gain knowledge of all the hidden truths when we die.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.