All the News That's Not Fit to Print

[Joseph McBride]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/03/upshot...0002&abg=1


Michael Beschloss, writing in the New York Times about Secret Service "protection" of presidents, admits that the performance of that agency in Dallas was "insufficient" (a mild way of putting it). He quotes LBJ's 1964 complaint that when he traveled, the Secret Service would "notify everybody in town what time you're coming, how you're coming, where you're coming. . . They do everything except kill you. They don't know how to operate their guns. Hell, I had 10 of 'em out there one day trying to kill a snake, and they couldn't kill it -- they just emptied the gun -- at my ranch."

But Beschloss apparently still believes the lie by LBJ that Secret Service Agent Rufus Youngblood threw himself over the front seat during the Kennedy assassination and shielded Johnson with his body in the back seat. Some of the reader comments on the article that have appeared on the Times website point to the Secret Service stand-down in Dallas and give more details, etc., but apparently for the Times, it is not acceptable to point out that Beschloss (regarded as a major historian by the mainstream media) is just wrong about Youngblood. I filed this comment, but the Times (so far) has not printed it:


October 3, 2014


Thank you for your submission. We'll notify you at [email address] when your comment has been approved.

Joseph McBrideBerkeley, CaliforniaPending Approval

In 1988, I interviewed former Texas Senator Ralph Yarborough, who was riding in the back seat of the car in Dallas with LBJ and Lady Bird Johnson. Yarborough scoffed at the story of Rufus Youngblood supposedly jumping over the front seat to shield LBJ with his body. Yarborough said Youngblood never left the front seat. The back seat was so full, as photographs of the car in the motorcade confirm, that there would not have been room for the agent along with three other people. From my book INTO THE NIGHTMARE, this is Yarborough's description of Johnson's reaction after the shots were fired:

"Absolutely motionless. Said nothing. You know that tale Johnson liked to tell about Youngblood, the Secret Service man, jumping over the front seat when the shots were fired and shielding him with his body? Well, that's as big a cock-and-bull tale as the time he told the Marines in Da Nang that his great-grandfather had fought at the Alamo. [Actually, Johnson told servicemen at Camp Stanley in Korea, 'My great-great-grandfather died at the Alamo.'] Youngblood never jumped over the seat. Johnson sat there stoically. The only time they moved was when we were going through the Triple Overpass, and Youngblood leaned over the seat -- he had a small radio receiver in his hand -- and Johnson leaned over, they were about six inches apart, and they listened to some transmission together on the radio. [A photograph indicates LBJ had ducked earlier.]"

[Tracy Riddle]

"When the legend becomes fact, print the legend." - The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance

[Martin White]

I had always thought that it was a uniquely American thing, that the media won't report conflicting facts with regard to this case.

However, I have recently read Mark Lane's Citizen's Dissent and his treatment by the BBC in 1967 was absolutely shocking. The BBC still maintains today that LHO killed JFK. Last year, on the 50th, BBC radio ran a "minute by minute" special going 100% down the WC timeline. I contacted the host, Jeremy Vine, via twitter and asked him whose timeline he intended to run. He replied "The Dallas timeline, what other timeline is there?" I suggested, as one example, the the time of the Tippitt shooting was under a great deal of debate. He didn't reply. I don't think he wanted to acknowledge that there was another view other than the WC.

Search the BBC website for JFK stories and they will not give any room, with serious intent, to alternative theories.

Now, what is interesting about this is, if you study the timeline of JFK coverage here in the UK, the BBC broadcast the Antony Summers documentary which was indicative of conspiracy. That was 1978 or so. I recall from the 1988 25 year specials that there was several programmes that at least asked serious questions, even if they did not come out clearly for a conspiracy. The series TMWKK was originated by UK tv, albeit not the BBC. It was originally broadcast by commercial channel ITV. The BBC did a "Timewatch" special in late 1993 or early 1994 in the wake of Posner's book Case Closed. Instead of a piece of independent journalism, it was an hour long commercial for Posner's book.

So it seems that the UK media did permit itself to be critical - or at least give airtime to different views from the WC - for a time from say the mid 70s [around the time of the HSCA] up to the 30th anniversary. After that, it's been WC all the way.

It would appear that around the time of the HSCA, some people were beginning to think that 1963 was far enough in the past that no harm could come of looking at it again. However, I think that the progress that was made by researchers by the 25th, and the determination to continue the search, surprised and shocked the power brokers. I think that at this point, just after the 25th - and in preparation for Oliver Stone's JFK - the noose around the media was retightened. And it has stayed that way.

I used to think that the BBC lost its journalistic credibility and integrity in the last 10-15 years. Reading Lane's book has made me realise that the credibility was lost before 1967.

It's not just BBC TV that toes the party line either. I don't recall seeing a single UK media outlet give an honest account of where the case was in 2013. It's as though the ARRB never existed. The "newspaper" the Daily Mail still runs the odd story about some aspect of the case (like the fact that Oswald's original coffin was auctioned recently) but always refers to Oswald as the killer. Now for those that don't know the Daily Mail, that newspaper supported Hitler before WW2. Today it runs scare stories. Virtually every foodstuff known to man has been linked by the Mail to causing cancer; all of the world's ills (particularly the UK's) are caused by immigrants; and the only thing worse than immigrants are muslim immigrants. It is a totally vile, right-wing mouthpiece that will print any fiction that serves its agenda.

The image of the media as the world's whistle blower is totally undeserved. As media outlets keep getting absorbed by huge corporation, so there are fewer and fewer media companies, this will only get worse.

[Tracy Riddle]

The strange thing about the BBC is that they have done some awesome documentaries on other subjects (Gladio, the USS Liberty attack), which you can view on YouTube. Overall, the BBC is miles ahead of any corporate media in the US, but on the Kennedy assassination, they are quite worthless.

[Magda Hassan]

The strange thing about the BBC is that they have done some awesome documentaries on other subjects (Gladio, the USS Liberty attack), which you can view on YouTube. Overall, the BBC is miles ahead of any corporate media in the US, but on the Kennedy assassination, they are quite worthless.

I doubt they'd ever do some thing like their previous coverage of the USS Liberty now. Their pro Israel anti Palestine stance is gross. The best drama covering issues in that area in recent years, 'The Promise' was done by Channel 4 after the BBC got cold feet.

[Martin White]

In the last few years, I've noticed that BBC News is very pro-Government, whoever is in charge. Especially the Tories though, as the Tories (despite owning 95% of the printed media) keep dropping not so subtle hints about shutting off their funding.

[Joseph McBride]

Here's the latest example of childish mockery on this
serious subject from the Boston Globe. It's unworthy
of the memory of President Kennedy and his Boston
heritage, but all too typical of what passes for
commentary in the MSM:

http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/...story.html

[Tracy Riddle]

Joseph, as a film historian, have you ever read Past Imperfect: History According to the Movies (1996, edited by Mark Carnes)? The chapter on "JFK" was written by Stanley Karnow, who sneers at the whole idea that Kennedy was planning on withdrawing from Vietnam. He also lists Posner's "Case Closed" as his source for "Background Reading."

[Joseph McBride]

Mainstream historians get much wrong
about American history, so they tend to be blinkered
about docudramas on that history.

As for PAST IMPERFECT, I think I read
that at the time but would have to refresh
my memory of it.

[Albert Doyle]

Who is Alex Beam? Any jackass can uncredibly mock conspiracy theorists, it takes a little more to actually look at the facts. Alex Beam would quickly be cut down in any open debate with Jim DiEugenio or Doug Horne (which is why mockers like Beam stay miles away from any honest media exchange with those factualists).