JFK Assassination: 60th Anniversary
Commencement Address at American University in Washington
35th President of the United States: 1961 ‐ 1963 19–24 minutes
Complete Transcript of the Address
President Anderson, members of the faculty, board of trustees, distinguished guests, my old colleague, Senator Bob Byrd, who has earned his degree through many years of attending night law school while I am earning mine in the next 30 minutes, ladies and gentlemen:
It is with great pride that I participate in this ceremony of the American University, sponsored by the Methodist Church, founded by Bishop John Fletcher Hurst, and first opened by President Woodrow Wilson in 1914. This is a young and growing university, but it has already fulfilled Bishop Hurst's enlightened hope for the study of history and public affairs in a city devoted to the making of history and to the conduct of the public's business. By sponsoring this institution of higher learning for all who wish to learn, whatever their color or their creed, the Methodists of this area and the Nation deserve the Nation's thanks, and I commend all those who are today graduating.
Professor Woodrow Wilson once said that every man sent out from a university should be a man of his nation as well as a man of his time, and I am confident that the men and women who carry the honor of graduating from this institution will continue to give from their lives, from their talents, a high measure of public service and public support.
"There are few earthly things more beautiful than a university," wrote John Masefield, in his tribute to English universities--and his words are equally true today. He did not refer to spires and towers, to campus greens and ivied walls. He admired the splendid beauty of the university, he said, because it was "a place where those who hate ignorance may strive to know, where those who perceive truth may strive to make others see."
I have, therefore, chosen this time and this place to discuss a topic on which ignorance too often abounds and the truth is too rarely perceived--yet it is the most important topic on earth: world peace.
What kind of peace do I mean? What kind of peace do we seek? Not a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war. Not the peace of the grave or the security of the slave. I am talking about genuine peace, the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living, the kind that enables men and nations to grow and to hope and to build a better life for their children--not merely peace for Americans but peace for all men and women--not merely peace in our time but peace for all time.
I speak of peace because of the new face of war. Total war makes no sense in an age when great powers can maintain large and relatively invulnerable nuclear forces and refuse to surrender without resort to those forces. It makes no sense in an age when a single nuclear weapon contains almost ten times the explosive force delivered by all of the allied air forces in the Second World War. It makes no sense in an age when the deadly poisons produced by a nuclear exchange would be carried by wind and water and soil and seed to the far corners of the globe and to generations yet unborn.
Today the expenditure of billions of dollars every year on weapons acquired for the purpose of making sure we never need to use them is essential to keeping the peace. But surely the acquisition of such idle stockpiles--which can only destroy and never create--is not the only, much less the most efficient, means of assuring peace.
I speak of peace, therefore, as the necessary rational end of rational men. I realize that the pursuit of peace is not as dramatic as the pursuit of war--and frequently the words of the pursuer fall on deaf ears. But we have no more urgent task.
Some say that it is useless to speak of world peace or world law or world disarmament-and that it will be useless until the leaders of the Soviet Union adopt a more enlightened attitude. I hope they do. I believe we can help them do it. But I also believe that we must reexamine our own attitude--as individuals and as a Nation--for our attitude is as essential as theirs. And every graduate of this school, every thoughtful citizen who despairs of war and wishes to bring peace, should begin by looking inward--by examining his own attitude toward the possibilities of peace, toward the Soviet Union, toward the course of the cold war and toward freedom and peace here at home.
First: Let us examine our attitude toward peace itself. Too many of us think it is impossible. Too many think it unreal. But that is a dangerous, defeatist belief. It leads to the conclusion that war is inevitable--that mankind is doomed--that we are gripped by forces we cannot control.
We need not accept that view. Our problems are manmade--therefore, they can be solved by man. And man can be as big as he wants. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings. Man's reason and spirit have often solved the seemingly unsolvable--and we believe they can do it again.
I am not referring to the absolute, infinite concept of universal peace and good will of which some fantasies and fanatics dream. I do not deny the value of hopes and dreams but we merely invite discouragement and incredulity by making that our only and immediate goal.
Let us focus instead on a more practical, more attainable peace--based not on a sudden revolution in human nature but on a gradual evolution in human institutions--on a series of concrete actions and effective agreements which are in the interest of all concerned. There is no single, simple key to this peace--no grand or magic formula to be adopted by one or two powers. Genuine peace must be the product of many nations, the sum of many acts. It must be dynamic, not static, changing to meet the challenge of each new generation. For peace is a process--a way of solving problems.
With such a peace, there will still be quarrels and conflicting interests, as there are within families and nations. World peace, like community peace, does not require that each man love his neighbor--it requires only that they live together in mutual tolerance, submitting their disputes to a just and peaceful settlement. And history teaches us that enmities between nations, as between individuals, do not last forever. However fixed our likes and dislikes may seem, the tide of time and events will often bring surprising changes in the relations between nations and neighbors.
So let us persevere. Peace need not be impracticable, and war need not be inevitable. By defining our goal more clearly, by making it seem more manageable and less remote, we can help all peoples to see it, to draw hope from it, and to move irresistibly toward it.
Second: Let us reexamine our attitude toward the Soviet Union. It is discouraging to think that their leaders may actually believe what their propagandists write. It is discouraging to read a recent authoritative Soviet text on Military Strategy and find, on page after page, wholly baseless and incredible claims--such as the allegation that "American imperialist circles are preparing to unleash different types of wars ... that there is a very real threat of a preventive war being unleashed by American imperialists against the Soviet Union ... [and that] the political aims of the American imperialists are to enslave economically and politically the European and other capitalist countries... [and] to achieve world domination ... by means of aggressive wars."
Truly, as it was written long ago: "The wicked flee when no man pursueth." Yet it is sad to read these Soviet statements--to realize the extent of the gulf between us. But it is also a warning--a warning to the American people not to fall into the same trap as the Soviets, not to see only a distorted and desperate view of the other side, not to see conflict as inevitable, accommodation as impossible, and communication as nothing more than an exchange of threats.
No government or social system is so evil that its people must be considered as lacking in virtue. As Americans, we find communism profoundly repugnant as a negation of personal freedom and dignity. But we can still hail the Russian people for their many achievements--in science and space, in economic and industrial growth, in culture and in acts of courage.
Among the many traits the peoples of our two countries have in common, none is stronger than our mutual abhorrence of war. Almost unique, among the major world powers, we have never been at war with each other. And no nation in the history of battle ever suffered more than the Soviet Union suffered in the course of the Second World War. At least 20 million lost their lives. Countless millions of homes and farms were burned or sacked. A third of the nation's territory, including nearly two thirds of its industrial base, was turned into a wasteland--a loss equivalent to the devastation of this country east of Chicago.
Today, should total war ever break out again--no matter how--our two countries would become the primary targets. It is an ironic but accurate fact that the two strongest powers are the two in the most danger of devastation. All we have built, all we have worked for, would be destroyed in the first 24 hours. And even in the cold war, which brings burdens and dangers to so many countries, including this Nation's closest allies--our two countries bear the heaviest burdens. For we are both devoting massive sums of money to weapons that could be better devoted to combating ignorance, poverty, and disease. We are both caught up in a vicious and dangerous cycle in which suspicion on one side breeds suspicion on the other, and new weapons beget counter-weapons.
In short, both the United States and its allies, and the Soviet Union and its allies, have a mutually deep interest in a just and genuine peace and in halting the arms race. Agreements to this end are in the interests of the Soviet Union as well as ours--and even the most hostile nations can be relied upon to accept and keep those treaty obligations, and only those treaty obligations, which are in their own interest.
So, let us not be blind to our differences-but let us also direct attention to our common interests and to the means by which those differences can be resolved. And if we cannot end now our differences, at least we can help make the world safe for diversity. For, in the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children's future. And we are all mortal.
Third: Let us reexamine our attitude toward the cold war, remembering that we are not engaged in a debate, seeking to pile up debating points. We are not here distributing blame or pointing the finger of judgment. We must deal with the world as it is, and not as it might have been had the history of the last 18 years been different.
We must, therefore, persevere in the search for peace in the hope that constructive changes within the Communist bloc might bring within reach solutions which now seem beyond us. We must conduct our affairs in such a way that it becomes in the Communists' interest to agree on a genuine peace. Above all, while defending our own vital interests, nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war. To adopt that kind of course in the nuclear age would be evidence only of the bankruptcy of our policy-or of a collective death-wish for the world.
To secure these ends, America's weapons are nonprovocative, carefully controlled, designed to deter, and capable of selective use. Our military forces are committed to peace and disciplined in self-restraint. Our diplomats are instructed to avoid unnecessary irritants and purely rhetorical hostility.
For we can seek a relaxation of tensions without relaxing our guard. And, for our part, we do not need to use threats to prove that we are resolute. We do not need to jam foreign broadcasts out of fear our faith will be eroded. We are unwilling to impose our system on any unwilling people--but we are willing and able to engage in peaceful competition with any people on earth.
Meanwhile, we seek to strengthen the United Nations, to help solve its financial problems, to make it a more effective instrument for peace, to develop it into a genuine world security system--a system capable of resolving disputes on the basis of law, of insuring the security of the large and the small, and of creating conditions under which arms can finally be abolished.
At the same time we seek to keep peace inside the non-Communist world, where many nations, all of them our friends, are divided over issues which weaken Western unity, which invite Communist intervention or which threaten to erupt into war. Our efforts in West New Guinea, in the Congo, in the Middle East, and in the Indian subcontinent, have been persistent and patient despite criticism from both sides. We have also tried to set an example for others--by seeking to adjust small but significant differences with our own closest neighbors in Mexico and in Canada.
Speaking of other nations, I wish to make one point clear. We are bound to many nations by alliances. Those alliances exist because our concern and theirs substantially overlap. Our commitment to defend Western Europe and West Berlin, for example, stands undiminished because of the identity of our vital interests. The United States will make no deal with the Soviet Union at the expense of other nations and other peoples, not merely because they are our partners, but also because their interests and ours converge.
Our interests converge, however, not only in defending the frontiers of freedom, but in pursuing the paths of peace. It is our hope--and the purpose of allied policies--to convince the Soviet Union that she, too, should let each nation choose its own future, so long as that choice does not interfere with the choices of others. The Communist drive to impose their political and economic system on others is the primary cause of world tension today. For there can be no doubt that, if all nations could refrain from interfering in the self-determination of others, the peace would be much more assured.
This will require a new effort to achieve world law--a new context for world discussions. It will require increased understanding between the Soviets and ourselves. And increased understanding will require increased contact and communication. One step in this direction is the proposed arrangement for a direct line between Moscow and Washington, to avoid on each side the dangerous delays, misunderstandings, and misreadings of the other's actions which might occur at a time of crisis.
We have also been talking in Geneva about other first-step measures of arms control, designed to limit the intensity of the arms race and to reduce the risks of accidental war. Our primary long-range interest in Geneva, however, is general and complete disarmament--designed to take place by stages, permitting parallel political developments to build the new institutions of peace which would take the place of arms. The pursuit of disarmament has been an effort of this Government since the 1920's. It has been urgently sought by the past three ado ministrations. And however dim the prospects may be today, we intend to continue this effort--to continue it in order that all countries, including our own, can better grasp what the problems and possibilities of disarmament are.
The one major area of these negotiations where the end is in sight, yet where a fresh start is badly needed, is in a treaty to outlaw nuclear tests. The conclusion of such a treaty, so near and yet so far, would check the spiraling arms race in one of its most dangerous areas. It would place the nuclear powers in a position to deal more effectively with one of the greatest hazards which man faces in 1963, the further spread of nuclear arms. It would increase our security--it would decrease the prospects of war. Surely this goal is sufficiently important to require our steady pursuit, yielding neither to the temptation to give up the whole effort nor the temptation to give up our insistence on vital and responsible safeguards.
I am taking this opportunity, therefore, to announce two important decisions in this regard.
First: Chairman Khrushchev, Prime Minister Macmillan, and I have agreed that highlevel discussions will shortly begin in Moscow looking toward early agreement on a comprehensive test ban treaty. Our hopes must be tempered with the caution of history--but with our hopes go the hopes of all mankind.
Second: To make clear our good faith and solemn convictions on the matter, I now declare that the United States does not propose to conduct nuclear tests in the atmosphere so long as other states do not do so. We will not be the first to resume. Such a declaration is no substitute for a formal binding treaty, but I hope it will help us achieve one. Nor would such a treaty be a substitute for disarmament, but I hope it will help us achieve it.
Finally, my fellow Americans, let us examine our attitude toward peace and freedom here at home. The quality and spirit of our own society must justify and support our efforts abroad. We must show it in the dedication of our own lives--as many of you who are graduating today will have a unique opportunity to do, by serving without pay in the Peace Corps abroad or in the proposed National Service Corps here at home.
But wherever we are, we must all, in our daily lives, live up to the age-old faith that peace and freedom walk together. In too many of our cities today, the peace is not secure because freedom is incomplete.
It is the responsibility of the executive branch at all levels of government--local, State, and National--to provide and protect that freedom for all of our citizens by all means within their authority. It is the responsibility of the legislative branch at all levels, wherever that authority is not now adequate, to make it adequate. And it is the responsibility of all citizens in all sections of this country to respect the rights of all others and to respect the law of the land.
All this is not unrelated to world peace. "When a man's ways please the Lord," the Scriptures tell us, "he maketh even his enemies to be at peace with him." And is not peace, in the last analysis, basically a matter of human rights--the right to live out our lives without fear of devastation-the right to breathe air as nature provided it--the right of future generations to a healthy existence?
While we proceed to safeguard our national interests, let us also safeguard human interests. And the elimination of war and arms is clearly in the interest of both. No treaty, however much it may be to the advantage of all, however tightly it may be worded, can provide absolute security against the risks of deception and evasion. But it can--if it is sufficiently effective in its enforcement and if it is sufficiently in the interests of its signers--offer far more security and far fewer risks than an unabated, uncontrolled, unpredictable arms race.
The United States, as the world knows, will never start a war. We do not want a war. We do not now expect a war. This generation of Americans has already had enough--more than enough--of war and hate and oppression. We shall be prepared if others wish it. We shall be alert to try to stop it. But we shall also do our part to build a world of peace where the weak are safe and the strong are just. We are not helpless before that task or hopeless of its success. Confident and unafraid, we labor on--not toward a strategy of annihilation but toward a strategy of peace.
Note: The President spoke at the John M. Reeves Athletic Field on the campus of American University after being awarded an honorary degree of doctor of laws. In his opening words he referred to Hurst R. Anderson, president of the university, and Robert C. Byrd, U.S. Senator from West Virginia.
John F. Kennedy, Commencement Address at American University in Washington Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/node/236652
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Transcript of C-Span Program:
June 3, 2017
National Security and President John. F. Kennedy, Part 3
Oliver Stone joined two authors to examine President John F. Kennedy’s assassination and what the panelists called the “national-security state.” They also discussed America’s involvement in Vietnam and the Cold War and how national security policies implemented during those conflicts continued to have an impact in contemporary times. This event was part of a conference hosted by the Future of Freedom Foundation. Some viewers may find language in this program offensive.
Available online at <https://www.c-span.org/video/?429392-7/national-security-president-john-f-kennedy-part-3>
Transcript of C-Span Program:
Jacob Hornberger (JH)
Jacob Hornberger acting as moderator JH (Moderator):
James DiEugenio (JD)
Oliver Stone (OS)
C-Span General Announcer: YOU ARE WATCHING AMERICAN HISTORY TV ALL WEEKEND EVERY WEEKEND ON C-SPAN3. >> COMING UP, ACADEMY AWARD-WINNING FILM MAKER OLIVER STONE JOINS TWO AUTHORS TO EXAMINE PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY'S ASSASSINATION.
JH: By Way of Self-Introduction I'M Jacob Hornberger, PRESIDENT OF THE FREEDOM FOUNDATION. [APPLAUSE] MANY OF YOU KNOW WE ARE DEVOTED TO PRESENTING AN UNCOMPROMISING MORAL, PHILOSOPHICAL, AND ECONOMIC CASE FOR THE EQUILIBRIUM PHILOSOPHY. I PRACTICED LAW FOR ABOUT 12 YEARS AND THAT SHIFTED GEARS AND WENT INTO THE EDUCATIONAL ARENA AND LIBERTARIAN PHILOSOPHY. WE HAVE PUBLISHED MANY BOOKS, BUT THE ONES THAT I AM REALLY PROUD OF are THE KENNEDY AUTOPSY, REGIME CHANGE, THE JFK ASSASSINATION, AND THE EVIL OF THE NATIONAL SECURITY STATE. IN 1954, THE CIA PUBLISHED A TOP SECRET CLASSIFIED DOCUMENT CALLED A STUDY OF ASSASSINATION. BY READING THIS DOCUMENT, IT'S CLEAR THAT BY THIS TIME, SEVEN YEARS AFTER THE CIA HAD BEEN CALLED INTO EXISTENCE WITH THE NATIONAL SECURITY ACT OF 1947 THAT THIS AGENCY WAS SPECIALIZING IN THE ART OF ASSASSINATION -- HOW TO KILL PEOPLE. AMONG THE FASCINATING PARTS OF THIS MEMORANDUM, THE STUDY, IS THAT THE CIA IS NOT ONLY TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE BEST, MOST EXPEDITIOUS WAYS TO KILL PEOPLE, BUT THEY WERE ALSO TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO SO IN A WAY WHERE PEOPLE WOULD NOT SUSPECT THAT THEY COMMITTED THE ASSASSINATION OR AT LEAST COULD NOT PROVE THAT THEY COMMITTED THE ASSASSINATIONS. IF WE JUMP AHEAD 10 YEARS AND GO INTO THE 1960'S AND 1970'S AND MOVE OVER TO THE SCHOOL OF THE AMERICAS, WHICH MANY LATIN AMERICANS CALL THE SCHOOL OF ASSASSINS, THIS WAS THE PENTAGON’s MILITARY TRAINING SCHOOL, ESPECIALLY FOR MILITARY OFFICIALS FROM LATIN AMERICA. THEY WERE PART OF RIGHT-WING MILITARY DICTATORSHIPS, SOME OF WHICH THE U.S. GOVERNMENT HAD INSTALLED INTO POWER. WE FIND THAT AT THAT SCHOOL, THEY WERE TEACHING THESE MILITARY OFFICIALS IN THE ART OF ASSASSINATION. THEY ALSO WERE TEACHING THEM IN THE ART OF TORTURE. THEY HAD TORTURE MANUALS THEY USED FOR THE torture COURSE. ONE OF THE FASCINATING ASPECT OF THE ASSASSINATION PROGRAM WAS HOW IT HAD DEVELOPED FROM 1954. ONE OF THE PRINCIPLES THEY WERE TEACHING WAS THAT WHEN YOU ARE COMMITTING A STATE ASSASSINATION, KILLING SOMEBODY, AND YOU DON'T WANT PEOPLE TO FOCUS ATTENTION ON YOU AS THE ASSASSIN, THAT A GREAT TECHNIQUE IS TO BLAME IT ON A COMMUNIST.
WHY A COMMUNIST? WHY NOT BLAME IT ON A CAPITALIST OR DOCTOR OR ACCOUNT, A BUSINESSMAN? TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION, WE HAVE TO GO BACK TO 1945. WORLD WAR II HAD JUST ENDED. UNITED STATES AND ALLIED POWERS HAD HE DID NAZI GERMANY -- DEFEATED NAZI GERMANY. A U.S. OFFICIAL SAID TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, "YOU JUST CANNOT REST. WE NOW HAVE A NEW ENEMY ARGUABLY MORE POWERFUL THAN THE ENEMY WE JUST DEFEATED, AND THIS NEW ENEMY IS OUR WORLD WAR II PARTNER AND ALLY, THE SOVIET UNION, AND SPECIFICALLY, THE COMMUNIST-CONTROLLED SOVIET UNION WHICH HAVE BEEN COMMUNIST CONTROLLED SINCE WORLD WAR I.
THE IDEA WAS THEY TOLD AMERICANS THEY ARE IN A WORLDWIDE COMMUNIST CONSPIRACY, AND IT'S BASED IN MOSCOW, RUSSIA, AND THIS CONSPIRACY ENTAILS COMMUNIST THAT ARE HELL-BENT ON CONQUERING THE WORLD, INCLUDING THE UNITED STATES, AND IN ORDER TO PREVENT THIS FROM HAPPENING, THEY SAID IT WOULD BE NECESSARY TO ALTER THE STRUCTURE OF THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT FROM WHAT WAS CALLED A LIMITED GOVERNMENT REPUBLIC WHERE GOVERNMENT POWERS ARE LIMITED, ENUMERATED, AND IN THE OPEN, TO WHAT IS CALLED A NATIONAL SECURITY STATE, WHICH IS A TOTALITARIAN TYPE OF GOVERNMENT WHERE GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS ARE ABLE TO OPERATE ESSENTIAL -- ESSENTIALLY OMNIPOTENT POWERS, MOSTLY IN SECRET. AS PART OF THIS IDEA THAT the COMMUNISTs ARE COMING TO GET US, THEY ALSO TALKED IN TERMS OF THE DANGERS OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF COMMUNISM, THAT THIS WAS A VERY DESTRUCTIVE PHILOSOPHY, THAT WAS LIKE A NARCOTIC, A SIREN SONG, THE IDEA THAT GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE TAKING CARE OF PEOPLE, THAT GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE TAKING FROM THE RICH AND GIVING TO THE POOR. THAT WHEN PEOPLE GOT A TASTE OF THIS PHILOSOPHY, THEY TEND TO WANT MORE OF IT. THEY WANT THE GOVERNMENT TO TAKE CARE OF THEM TO A LARGER EXTENT.
SO YOU HAD THIS TWIN THREAT THAT BECAME PART OF THE COLD WAR THAT COMMUNIST ARE COMING TO GET US AND THIS PHILOSOPHY IS THREATENING TO ENVELOP US, AND AS PART OF WHAT BECAME KNOWN AS THE ANTI-COMMUNIST CRUSADE, THE ENTIRE NATIONAL SECURITY ESTABLISHMENT -- THE PENTAGON, CIA, nsa, FBI -- BEGAN MONITORING PEOPLES'S ACTIVITY AND HARASSING THEM AND INFILTRATING ORGANIZATIONS, ESPECIALLY LEFTIST ORGANIZATIONS BECAUSE THERE WAS A FINE LINE BETWEEN BEING A LEFTIST OR LIBERAL AND PROGRESSIVE AND BEING A SOCIALIST AND COMMUNIST. A LOT OF LEFTIST ORGANIZATIONS WERE BEING INFILTRATED. THE COMMUNIST PARTY WAS, BUT THEN THERE WAS ALSO AN ORGANIZATION CALLED THE FAIR PLAY FOR CUBA COMMITTEE, WHICH WAS JUST A NATIONAL ORGANIZATION SAYING WE WANT NORMAL RELATIONS with CUBA. OF COURSE, THERE WAS THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT. MARTIN LUTHER KING WAS SUSPECTED TO BE A COMMUNIST. THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT WAS SUSPECTED TO BE A COMMUNIST FRONT THAT WOULD LEAD COMMUNIST INTO AMERICA. WE ARE ALL FAMILIAR WITH TRUMBO. CAREERS WERE RUINED. THE McCARTHY HEARINGS, THAT INFAMOUS QUESTION THAT STRUCK FEAR INTO THE HEARTS OF ANYONE WHO HAD EVER HAD ANY EXPOSURE TO COMMUNISM. ARE YOU NOW OR HAVE YOU EVER BEEN A MEMBER OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY? THEy DESTROYED CAREERS. THEY DESTROYED LIVES.
SO IT IS WITHIN THIS CONTEXT THAT THE TRAGEDY STARTS TO MAKE SENSE. BLAME IT ON THE COMMUNISTS. IF YOU START TO QUESTION THE OFFICIAL VERSION, IF YOU START POINTING THE FINGER AT THE GOVERNMENT, THEY CAN TURN AROUND AND SAY YOU'RE A LEFTIST PINKO, OBVIOUSLY A COMMUNIST SYMPATHIZER, AND IT CERTAINLY TENDS TO DIMINISH THE INCENTIVE AMONG LEFTISTS WHO HAve HAD SOCIALIST PROCLIVITIES FROM GOING DOWN THE ROAD.
THE STUDY OF ASSASSINATION DID NOT OCCUR IN A VACUUM. IT OCCURRED IN THE MIDDLE OF A REGIME CHANGE AS PART OF A REGIME CHANGE OPERATION IN GUATEMALA. FIRST ONE BEING IN 1953 AND IRAN, BUT WHAT HAD HAPPENED IN GUATEMALA IS THE GUATEMALAN PEOPLE HAD HAD THE TEMERITY TO DEMOCRATICALLY ELECT, IN A LEGITIMATE ELECTION, A SELF-AVOWED SOCIALIST, A COMMUNIST, A PERSON WHO BELIEVED THAT WE ARE GOING TO TAKE MONEY FROM THE RICH AND GIVE IT TO THE POOR AND THIS IS THE SALVATION OF POVERTY. AND HE STARTS TAKING LAND FROM A GIANT U.S. CORPORATION THAT HAD MAJOR CONNECTIONS TO THE CIA AND TWO MEMBERS OF CONGRESS, AND HE STARTS DISTRIBUTING IT TO THE POOR, TO PEASANTS IN GUATEMALA. THIS TURNS ALL KINDS OF ALARM BELLS ON IN WASHINGTON. My GOSH, A COMMUNIST THAT HAS BEEN DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED?
IT'S WHEN HE STARTS REACHING OUT TO THE SOVIET UNION AND SAYS HE DOES NOT CARE ABOUT THE COLD WAR AND WILL ESTABLISH FRIENDLY RELATIONS WITH THEM, AND HE WANTS TO ESTABLISH PEACE WITH CUBA. THAT SEALED HIS FATE. AT THAT POINT, HE WAS DEEMED A GREAT THREAT TO U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY. WHEN HE WAS CAUGHT SMUGGLING WEAPONS from CZECHOSLOVAKIA, WHICH WAS A SOVIET SATELLITE STATE, THAT DID IT. WAS HE GOING TO TAKE THESE WEAPONS AND TAKE THE GUATEMALAN ARMY UP THROUGH MEXICO AND DOWN ACROSS BROWNSVILLE AND TAKE OVER TEXAS AND THE UNITED STATES? NOBODY ever MADE THAT CLEAR, BUT THE IDEA WAS WE NEEDED TO TARGET HIM FOR A REGIME CHANGE OPERATION. ONE OF THESE OMNIPOTENT POWERS NOT LISTED IN THE CONSTITUTION. NOTHING IMPORTANT. GUATEMALA NEVER ATTACKED THE UNITED STATES OR EVEN THREATENED TO. AS PART OF THE REGIME CHANGE OPERATION, THE CIA COMES UP WITH AN ASSASSINATION LIST OF PEOPLE WHO THEY ARE OTHER PROXIES WHO ARE GOING TO START THIS REGIME CHANGE OPERATION IT'S OK TO ASSASSINATE. AMAZING.
IF WE JUMP AHEAD 20 YEARS OR SO, 1970 TO 1973, WE GO TO CHILE, WHICH IS EVEN FURTHER AWAY FROM THE UNITED STATES. BY THE WAY, THEY SUCCEEDED IN THAT REGIME CHANGE OPERATION, OUSTING Arbenz FROM POWER. LUCKILY, HE WAS ABLE TO GET OUT ABOUT BEING ASSASSINATED, BUT THEN THE CHILEAN PEOPLE DO THE SAME THING. THEY HAVE THE TEMERITY TO DEMOCRATICALLY ELECT A SELF-AVOWED SOCIALIST, COMMUNIST. HE WAS A PHYSICIAN. HE WAS AN INTELLECTUAL. HIS NAME WAS SALVADOR ALLENDE. CONGRESS IS GETTING READY TO CONFIRM HIM AS PRESIDENT AND ALL THE ALARM BELLS GO OFF IN WASHINGTON. HERE WE ARE AGAIN, ANOTHER COMMUNIST DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED. THIS IS NOT GOOD. THEN Allende MAKES IT EVEN WORSE BECAUSE HE IS TALKING ABOUT WANTING TO ESTABLISH FRIENDSHIP WITH THE SOVIET UNION, GOT NOTHING AGAINST RUSSIA, MOSCOW. THAT SEALED HIS FATE.
NOW Allende IS DEEMED A THREAT TO NATIONAL SECURITY, SO THE ORDER IS GIVEN. REGIME CHANGE. THE CIA GOES IN. THEY TRIED TO BRIBE THE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS SO THEY DO NOT VOTE FOR HIM OR CONFIRM HIM AS PRESIDENT. THAT DOES NOT WORK, SO THEY START TALKING ABOUT A MILITARY COUP TO TAKE CONTROL AND PREVENT ALLENDE FROM COMING INTO POWER, BUT THERE IS ONE BIG OBSTACLE, A MAN NAMED GENERAL RENE SCHNEIDER, THE OVERALL COMMANDING GENERAL OF CHILE'S ARMED FORCES. A MAN OF IMPECCABLE INTEGRITY. HE HAS A COUPLE OF SONS, AND HE SAYS TO U.S. OFFICIALS This IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. HE'S A SOLDIER WHO TOOK AN OATH TO SUPPORT AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION OF HIS COUNTRY, AND IT PROVIDES ONLY FOR IMPEACHMENT OR ELECTION TO OUST A PRESIDENT FOR OFFICE. IT DOES NOT PROVIDE FOR A MILITARY COUP, AND OF STORY.
THE CIA POSITION WAS DIFFERENT. THEY ARE HERE TELLING SCHNEIDER AND THE REST OF THE MILITARY ESTABLISHMENT, THE NATIONAL SECURITY ESTABLISHMENT OF THIS COUNTRY THEY HAVE A MORAL DUTY TO SAVE THIS COUNTRY. THE COUNTRY IS GOING DOWN WITH COMMUNISM, WITH SOCIALISM WHEN HE STARTS ADOPTING ALL THESE PROGRAMS, AND IT DOES NOT MATTER. DON'T TELL US TECHNICALITIES IN YOUR CONSTITUTION AND WHAT THE LAW SAYS BECAUSE IT'S A COUNTRY GOES DOWN, WHAT GOOD IS YOUR CONSTITUTION? YOU HAVE A MORAL DUTY TO SAVE YOUR COUNTRY BY VIOLENTLY OUSTING YOUR PRESIDENT FROM OFFICE AND TAKING CONTROL AND SAVING THE COUNTRY. SCHNEIDER STANDS HIS GROUND. SO A CONSPIRACY ARISES WITHIN WASHINGTON, VIRGINIA, OR BOTH IN WHICH THE DECISION IS MADE TO KIDNAP SCHNEIDER VIOLENTLY AND REMOVE HIM FROM THE SCENE. THE CIA HAS ALWAYS DENIED THAT THE CONSPIRACY INVOLVED MURDERING HIM, BUT THEY LIED ABOUT EVERY OTHER ASPECT OF THE OPERATION, AND THE DENIALS RING ALSO BECAUSE WHAT ELSE COULD THEY HAVE DONE? THEY KIDNAPPED THE GUY. THE COUP TAKES OVER. WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO DO -- RETURNED HIM TO SOCIETY? THERE WAS NO CHANCE OF THAT. THE KIDNAPPING ATTEMPT TAKES PLACE. THE CIA SMUGGLES IN HIGH-POWERED WEAPONS. SCHNEIDER IS ARMED. HE IS A GENERAL, AND HE FIGHTS BACK AGAINST THE KIDNAPPERS, AND THEY SHOOT HIM DEAD.
SO THE OBSTACLE IS REMOVED AND OVER A THREE-YOUR PERIOD OF TIME, THE CIA STARTS BRIBING TRUCKERS NOT TO DELIVER FOOD AND CREATING ALL KINDS OF CHAOS ALONG WITH ALLENDE'S SOCIALIST POLICIES, WHICH ALSO WORK CAUSING CHAOS AND CRISIS, MUCH LIKE IN VENEZUELA TODAY, SO ALL THIS LEADS TO A COUP WITH THE NATIONAL SECURITY ESTABLISHMENT IS ATTACKING THE PRESIDENT WITH INFANTRY SURROUNDING HIS DECISION, AND ALLENDE IS FIGHTING BACK WITH SMALL ARMS FIRE, BUT HE ENDS UP DEAD. APPARENTLY COMMITTED SUICIDE.
GENERAL PINOCHET TAKES POWER, PROCEEDS TO ROUND UP TENS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE, KIDNAPPING THEM, PUTTING THEM INTO MILITARY DUNGEONS, RAPING THEM -- HIS FORCES WERE -- COMMITTING THE MOST GRUESOME SEXUAL ACTS AGAINST THE WOMEN THAT YOU CAN EVEN IMAGINE, DISAPPEARING THEM OR EXECUTING THEM, INCLUDING TWO AMERICANS WITH THE COMPLICITY OF U.S. INTELLIGENCE AGENTS, AND THE IDEA WAS -- AND THE U.S. WAS FLOODING PINOCHET'S REGIME with foreign aid AT THIS POINT. THEY THOUGHT HE WAS FANTASTIC, THAT WHAT HE WAS DOING TO ALL THESE PEOPLE WAS WONDERFUL BECAUSE THEY WERE COMMUNIST. YOU SEE, IF THEY ARE COMMUNIST, IT'S NO PROBLEM DOING THIS BECAUSE THIS IS A COLD WAR. OBVIOUSLY, THE U.S. WAS NOT DOING THIS TO COMMUNISTS IN AMERICA. THEY WERE JUST SURVEILLING THEM AND HARASSING THEM AND DESTROYING THEIR CAREERS.
IN CHILE, PINOCHET WAS GOING ALL THE WAY. BY THE WAY, COMMUNISTS WERE STILL KILLING U.S. TROOPS IN VIETNAM AT THIS TIME, SO IT WAS ALL CONSIDERED WAR. IF WE GO INTO THE MIDDLE PERIOD, BETWEEN 1954 AND 70 - 73, WE GO INTO 1959, THERE'S A MAN NAMED FIDEL CASTRO THAT HAS TAKEN POWER IN CUBA. WE HEAR ABOUT A LOT OF THE DICTATORSHIP OF WE DO NOT HEAR ABOUT THE MaN HE OUSTED FROM POWER, Fulgencio Batista, WHO WAS ONE OF THE MOST BRUTAL, CORRUPT DICTATORS IN THE WORLD. HE ENTERED INTO A PARTNERSHIP WITH THE MAFIA TO RUN THE CASINOS IN HAVANA. THE MAFIA, AS WE ALL KNOW, IS A MURDEROUS, BLACKMAILING, EXTORTION CRIMINAL ORGANIZATION, AND HE GETS A CUT OF THE ACTION IN RETURN FOR THIS. TO GIVE YOU A REAL MEASURE OF THE MAN, HE HAS HIS POLICE FORCES ROUNDING UP LITTLE GIRLS, MINERS, AND BRINGING THEM INTO HAVANA OUT IN THE VILLAGES TO SERVE AS SEXUAL FAVORS FOR WELL-HEELED BUSINESSMAN WHO ARE GAMBLERS IN THE CASINO COMING IN FROM THE UNITED STATES. NOT SURPRISINGLY, A LOT OF CUBANS DID NOT LIKE THIS. IF YOU OBJECTED, YOU FOUND YOURSELF IN A DUNGEON TORTURED, EXECUTED. THUS, THE REVOLUTION STARTS. AND IT REALLY WAS NOT CASTRO THAT STARTED IT. HE WAS ACTUALLY IN JAIL.
A WOMAN NAMED TEDDY A SANCHEZ -- TEVIA SANCHEZ, ONE OF HER BEST FRIENDS, A YOUNG GIRL, 12 OR 13, GOT RAPED, AND SHE SAID ENOUGH WAS ENOUGH, AND SHE IS CELEBRATED IN HUMAN HISTORY -- IN CUBAN HISTORY AS THE STARTER OF THE REVOLUTION. Batista absconds from the country with hundreds of millions of dollars, state funds. CASTRO TAKES POWER, AND IT'S NOT REAL CLEAR WHERE HE STANDS AT FIRST. PEOPLE ARE KIND OF GETTING THE MEASURE OF THIS MAN, BUT HE MAKES IT VERY CLEAR FROM THE BEGINNING THAT HE SAYS, "WE ARE NOW INDEPENDENT OF U.S. CONTROL.”
THIS WAS A SHOCK. THIS RAISES EYEBROWS IN WASHINGTON. CUBA HAD BEEN UNDER CONTROL OF THE UNITED STATES FROM 1898, THE SPANISH-AMERICAN WAR WHERE WE HAD DOUBLE CROSSED THEM. WE SAID WE WERE GOING TO HELP THEM WITH THEIR INDEPENDENCE FROM SPAIN, BUT AFTER THE INDEPENDENCE WAS WON, WE FORGOT TO TELL YOU, WE ARE NOW IN CONTROL. SO THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT HAD CONTROLLED CUBA all the way up to 1959, AND CASTRO SAYS NO MORE. IT'S OVER. WE ARE NOW INDEPENDENT. THEN HE STARTS TO DISPLAY THE SAME SOCIALIST, COMMUNIST PROCLIVITIES, (that Arbenz had displayed and that Allende would later display) AND THIS CAUSES REAL ALARM BELLS TO GO OFF. A COMMUNIST 90 MILES FROM AMERICAN SHORES. WHAT'S GUATEMALA? A COUPLE THOUSAND MILES AWAY, Chile is what? 8,000 miles away.
THIS IS 90 MILES AWAY FROM AMERICAN SHORES. THIS IS A COMMUNIST REGIME. THIS IS A DAGGER POINTED OUT AMERICA'S THROAT. NEVER MIND CUBA NEVER ATTACKED THE UNITED STATES, NEVER THREATENED TO ATTACK THE UNITED STATES, NEVER COMMITTED AN ACT OF TERRORISM, THEY ARE A GRAVE THREAT TO UNITED STATES SECURITY. THEN CASTRO SEALED HIS FATE. HE STARTS REACHING OUT TO THE SOVIET UNION, TELLING U.S. OIL COMPANIES THAT OPERATE IN CUBA TO REFINE SOVIET OIL, AND THE AMERICAN OFFICIALS TELL U.S. OIL PRODUCERS NOT TO REFINE THAT, THAT ITS COMMUNIST OIL, AND EVERYTHING SPIRALS OUT OF CONTROL, AND CASTRO'S FATE IS SEALED.
NOW WE HAD A REGIME CHANGE OPERATION THAT WOULD ULTIMATELY MANIFEST ITSELF IN A PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN THE CIA AND MAFIA TO ASSASSINATE CASTRO. INTO THIS MAELSTROM COMES JOHN F. KENNEDY. HE HAD TO BE PRESENT AT EISENHOWER'S FAREWELL ADDRESS, WhERE EISENHOWER, IRONICALLY, WHO HAD BEEN IN CHARGE OF THESE OUSTED, TELLS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, "BY THE WAY, I WANT TO WARN YOU ABOUT SOMETHING, AND THAT IS THIS NEW WAY OF LIFE WE HAVE HERE, THAT THE MILITARY-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX CONSTITUTES A GRAVE THREAT TO YOUR FREEDOM AND THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS, SOMETHING THE PEOPLE OF GUATEMALA HAD ALREADY DISCOVERED AND THE PEOPLE OF CHILE WOULD DISCOVER, BUT KENNEDY COMES INTO OFFICE PRETTY MUCH YOUR STANDARD COLD WARRIOR. HE EMBODIES ALL THE "COMMUNISTS ARE COMING TO GET US" LIKE ALL AMERICANS. COMMUNISM IS A DANGEROUS SIREN SONG OF A PHILOSOPHY. PRETTY MUCH YOUR STANDARD COLD WARRIOR. NOT COMPLETELY.
BUT IMMEDIATELY, THE CIA PRESENTS HIM WITH A PLAN THAT HAD BEEN BROUGHT UP UNDER EISENHOWER WITH THE CIA HAS GONE TO EISENHOWER AND SAID WE HAD TWO SUCCESSES UNDER OUR BELT. WE'VE GOT IRAN, GUATEMALA, SO WE CAN DO THIS. WE CAN DO IT AGAIN. EISENHOWER SAYS GO FOR IT, BUT THEY HAD NOT FINISHED IN TIME, AND THEY REALLY THOUGHT NIXON WAS GOING TO WIN, SO THERE WOULD JUST BE THIS CONTINUITY, BUT NIXON DID NOT WIN, AND SUDDENLY, THE MAN THEY CONSIDERED KIND OF A NEOPHYTE PLAYBOY JUNIOR SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS, THEY PLAY HIM AND PRESENT THIS PLAN TO HIM. THEY SAY, MR. PRESIDENT, WE HAVE THIS ALL SET UP. THE EXILES ARE TRAINED. THERE WILL BE NO U.S. INVOLVEMENT. THEY WILL WIN. THE CUBAN PEOPLE ARE GOING TO RISE UP BECAUSE THEY DO NOT LIKE CASTRO, AND KENNEDY SAYS “LET'S DO IT”, BUT WANTS TO MAKE IT CLEAR THEY WILL BE NO U.S. INVOLVEMENT IN THIS, EXCEPT SECRETLY. THE LIES ARE BUILT INTO THE PLAN FROM THE BEGINNING. THEY SAID NO, NO U.S. SUPPORT WILL BE NECESSARY. WELL,
THEY WERE PLAYING HIM. THEY KNEW THAT IT COULD NOT SUCCEED WITHOUT U.S. SUPPORT, BUT THEY FIGURED THAT KENNEDY WOULD BE TRAPPED, THAT HE WOULD SAY, WE CANNOT LOSE FACE. A COMMUNIST DEFEATING THE CUBAN EXILES AT THE BAY OF PIGS -- HOW COULD WE TOLERATE THAT? THE WORLD WOULD LOSE RESPECT FOR US, and the Communists would be encouraged. THEY KNEW THEY WERE MANIPULATING HIM INTO HAVING TO PROVIDE THAT SUPPORT. THE INVASION STARTS. CUBAN EXILES ARE GETTING MASSACRED AND CAPTURED. SO THEY COME TO KENNEDY AND SAY WE WERE WRONG, WE NEED THE AIR SUPPORT AFTER ALL THINKING OF COURSE HE WOULD HAVE TO SAY YES, AND KENNEDY SAYS, I TOLD YOU, NO AIR SUPPORT, AND YOU TOLD ME NONE WOULD BE NECESSARY. IT'S NOT COMING.
Well, THE CUBAN EXILES ARE DEFEATED. CASTRO IS CROWING ABOUT THIS. THE WHOLE WORLD IS MARVELING THIS LITTLE Communist ARMY HAS DEFEATED A U.S. -TRAINED ARMY, AND THERE IS TREMENDOUS ANGER AND ANTIPATHY AS A RESULT. THE CIA AND CUBAN EXILES WERE CONSIDERING KENNEDY TO BE A BETRAYER, A TRADER, A PERSON THAT BETRAYED THE CUBAN PEOPLE, THE CAUSE OF FREEDOM, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, EVERYTHING THAT WE STAND FOR. WORST OF ALL, HE HAD LEFT THIS dagger pointed at America’s throat. THAT AMERICA COULD NOT SURVIVE WITH.
KENNEDY, FOR HIS PART, WAS ANGRY BECAUSE HE KNEW HE HAD BEEN PLAYED. HE HAD FIGURED OUT HE HAD GOTTEN DOUBLE CROSSED. HE SAID HE WAS GOING TO TAKE THE CIA AND TEAR THEM INTO 1000 PIECES AND SCATTER THEM TO THE WIND. THOSE WERE HIS WORDS. HE DOES THE UNTHINKABLE -- HE FIRES THE MUCH REVERED DIRECTOR OF THE CIA, Allen Dules. GUY WAS A WORLD WAR II INTELLIGENCE VETERAN. MUCH REVERED WITHIN THE AGENCY. KENNEDY SAYS, "YOU'RE OUT. " TO ADD INSULT TO INJURY, HE PUTS HIS BROTHER BOBBY IN CHARGE OF MONITORING THE CIA, WHICH THEY HATED BECAUSE THEY HAD HAD PRETTY MUCH CARTE BLANCHE UNDER EISENHOWER FOR EIGHT YEARS. HERE IS THE GENESIS OF THE WAR. IT EXPANDED TO THE MILITARY. THAT THE MILITARY IS EXHORTING KENNEDY AFTER THIS. "WE HAVE TO INVADE CUBA" AND THEY PRESENT HIM WITH THIS PLAN, WHICH THEY WERE TOTALLY CONVINCED WAS NECESSARY. IT WAS A UNANIMOUS PLAN, Operation Northwoods, THAT SAYS WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TERRORIST ATTACKS BY U.S. SECRET AGENTS POSING AS COMMUNISTS, AND WHEN REAL PEOPLE DIE -- THEY HAVE TO BE SACRIFICED FOR THE GREATER GOOD -- KENNEDY WILL GO ON NATIONAL TELEVISION AND SAY, MY FELLOW AMERICANS, WE'VE BEEN ATTACKED, I'M GOING TO SEND TROOPS INTO CUBA TO DEFEND AMERICA TO DEFEND YOUR RIGHTS AND FREEDOM, THE TROOPS WILL BE SERVING OUR COUNTRY AND WE WILL GET RID OF THIS COMMUNIST REGIME .
THEY WERE CONVINCED UNDER THIS COLD WAR MINDSET THAT AMERICA COULD NOT SURVIVE WITH CUBA 90 MILES AWAY. SO KENNEDY, TO HIS EVERLASTING CREDIT, SAYS NO, AND THEY WERE FURIOUS. ABSOLUTELY FURIOUS. THEN COMES THE CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS. WE ALWAYS HEAR FROM THE MAINSTREAM PRESS THESE WERE OFFENSIVE WEAPONS. THEY WERE NOTHING OF THE SORT. THEY WERE ENTIRELY DEFENSIVE. IF THEY WERE OFFENSIVE, THEY WOULD HAVE HIRED THEM AND STARTED WORLD WAR III. THEY NEVER FIRED THEM. THEY WERE THERE FOR DEFENSIVE PURPOSES. WHY? CASTRO HAD GOTTEN WIND OF THE FACT AT THE MILITARY AND CIA WERE STILL DEMANDING THAT KENNEDY INVADE THE ISLAND, AND CASTRO WAS NOT DUMB. HE KNEW HE COULD DEFEAT SOME CUBAN EXILES BUT THERE WAS NO WAY HE COULD DEFEAT THE U.S. ARMY. IMPOSSIBLE. Just like Sadaam or any other Third World Country could not defeat the U.S. military.
SO HE FIGURED HIS ONLY CHANCE TO KEEP CUBA INDEPENDENT AND TO STAY ALIVE WAS TO BRING THE SOVIETS IN, BRING A NUCLEAR WEAPON TO DETER A U.S. ATTACK. KEEP IN MIND AGAIN, CUBA HAD NEVER ATTACKED THE UNITED STATES, NEVER THREATENED TO DO SO. So, the SOVIETS SAY OK, BUT ONLY FOR DEFENSE. IF THE U.S. INVADES, YOU'VE GOT THE WEAPONS. DURING THE CRISIS, THE MILITARY, THE PENTAGON, THE CIA ARE DEMANDING KENNEDY INVADE. THIS IS YOUR CHANCE, MR. PRESIDENT. WE CANNOT SURVIVE WITH CUBA BEING COMMUNIST. YOU HAVE YOUR EXCUSE NOW. THEY HAVE WEAPONS.
KENNEDY, IN A MOMENT OF TREMENDOUS GREATNESS, SAYS NO, WE'RE GOING TO TALK. HE PUTS HIS BROTHER BOBBY IN CHARGE OF TALKING TO THE SOVIET EMISSARY. KHRUSHCHEV SAYS YOU HAVE NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN TURKEY AIMED AT US, RIGHT ON OUR BORDERS. WHY CAN WE NOT HAVE NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN CUBA AIMED AT YOU? KENNEDY SEES THE HYPOCRISY OF IT AND SAYS YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. I WILL TAKE MY MISSILES OUT OF TURKEY. THEY SET ALL WE'RE DOING HERE IS WE HAVE MISSILES BECAUSE YOU ARE THREATENING TO INVADE CUBA, AND KENNEDY SAYS OK, I GIVE YOU MY VOW WE WILL NOT INVADE CUBA, AND THEY SAY OK, WE WILL REMOVE THE MISSILES, AND THAT SHOWS THEY WERE DEFENSIVE IN PURPOSE. THAT WAS THE DEAL THAT WAS CUT.
IT SHOCKED THE MILITARY, SHOCKED THE CIA. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO OVERSTATE THEIR REACTION. LOOK WHAT KENNEDY HAD DONE IN ONE FELL SWOOP. HE HAD PULLED THE CARPET OUT FROM TWO OR THREE YEARS OF STUDY, REPORT, ANALYSES, REGIME CHANGE OPERATIONS BECAUSE THEY KNEW THE ONLY WAY TO OUST CASTRO FROM POWER -- EVERYTHING ELSE HAD FAILED, ASSASSINATION, EVERYTHING -- WAS INVASION. SUDDENLY KENNEDY HAD SAID THAT IS ALL OVER. THAT IS WHY WAS CALLED THE GREATEST DEFEAT IN U.S. HISTORY. THAT'S WHY HE SAID IT WAS APPEASEMENT OF THE COMMUNISTS. IN THEIR MIND, KENNEDY HAD SURRENDERED TO THE COMMUNISTS, THAT IT WAS ALL OVER, AMERICA HAD LOST THE COLD WAR AND IT WAS ONLY A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE COMMUNISTs WERE HERE. MAINSTREAM MEDIA SAYS CREWS JUST BLINKS DESK CHRISTIAN -- KRUSCHE V BLINKS. ACTUALLY, HE NEVER BLINKED. IT WAS KENNEDY WHO BLINKED, AND THANK GOD HE DID BECAUSE IT TURNED OUT WITH THE CIA DID NOT KNOW WAS THAT SOVIET COMMANDERS ON THE GROUND HAD ARMED NUCLEAR BATTLEFIELD WEAPONS, NUCLEAR WEAPONS WITH BATTLEFIELD AUTHORITY TO FIRE THOSE WEAPONS IN CASE OF AN INVASION. THERE IS NO DOUBT THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN ALL THAT NUCLEAR WAR THE FIRST TIME ONE OF THOSE MISSILES was fired if Kennedy had FOLLOWed THE advice of THE PENTAGON.
Kennedy DOES NOT STOP THERE. HE HAS ACHIEVED IN A GIANT BREAKTHROUGH. THERE A LOT OF STUFF GOING ON HERE, SO HE PREPARES A MAGNIFICENT SPEECH. I THINK IT IS ONE OF THE BEST SPEECHES IN PRESIDENTIAL HISTORY IF NOT THE BEST. THE KEY SPEECH HE DELIVERED THAT AMERICAN UNIVERSITY, AND HE DOES NOT CONSULT WITH THE CIA, THE PENTAGON, LET THEM KNOW WHAT HE IS UP TO. HE APPEARS THERE AND SAYS WE ARE HEREBY ENDING THE COLD WAR. WE ARE GOING TO LIVE IN PEACE AND HARMONY AND PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE WITH THE SOVIET UNION. WE MIGHT NOT AGREE WITH THEIR PHILOSOPHY AND WE DO NOT AGREE WITH OURS, BUT WE ARE GOING TO GET ALONG AND PUT AN END TO ALL OF THIS STUFF. AND He EVEN PROPOSED A JOINT MISSION TO THE MOON, SHARING MISSILE TECHNOLOGY WITH A COMMUNIST WHO ARE HELL-BENT ON DESTROYING US. THIS IS WHAT HAD SEALED Arbenzes fate, what would seal Allende’s fate. REACHING OUT TO THE SOVIET UNION, THE COMMUNIST IN A SPIRIT OF -- COMMUNISTS IN A SPIRIT OF FRIENDSHIP AND PEACE. He also proposed, and later signed, the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.
HOW CAN WE WIN A NUCLEAR WAR WE CANNOT TEST OUR NUCLEAR WEAPONS ABOVE GROUND AND BELOWGROUND? YOU ARE DISARMING. THIS IS A TRICK BY THE COMMUNISTS TO CAUSE AMERICA TO DISARM. AND THEN KENNEDY DOES THE Unthinkable. HE ENTERS INTO PERSONAL NEGOTIATION -- PERSON TO PERSON NEGOTIATIONS WITH KHRUSHCHEV, BACK CHANNEL NEGOTIATIONS WITH FIDEL CASTRO USING Private EMISSARIES, CIRCUMVENTING THE PENTAGON, CIA, AND NOT TELLING THEM. AND THEY END THE COLD WAR, WITH THE EMBARGO AGAINST CUBA, ESTABLISH NORMAL RELATIONS WITH THE COMMUNIST WORLD. HE THOUGHT THEY WERE SECRET, BUT THE CUBAN AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED NATIONS THAT WAS TRANSLATED ALL OF THIS SUPPOSEDLY SAID WITH 99% CERTAINTY HIS PHONES WERE BEING TAPPED by the CIA and the NSA just like they are today. AND THE CIA KNEW EXACTLY WHAT KENNEDY WAS UP TO. HE WAS SELLING AT AMERICA TO THE COMMUNIST WORLD.
WE KNOW ALL OF THIS CAME TO AN END ON NOVEMBER 22, 1963. ONE OF THE FASCINATING ASPECTS OF THAT ASSASSINATION WAS THAT IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE ASSASSINATION, IT WAS BLAMED ON THE COMMUNISTS. AND ALMOST IMMEDIATELY, WITHIN A FEW HOURS AFTER THE ASSASSINATION, THERE WAS A GROUP IN NEW ORLEANS CALLED THE DRE -- Composed of CUBAN EXILES -- THAT STARTED PUBLISHING ADVERTISEMENTS, PRESS RELEASES, ADVERTISING WE HARVEY OSWALD -- LEE HARVEY OSWALD WAS COMMUNIST BONA FIDE. IT WAS A GROUP THAT WAS BEING GENEROUSLY FUNDED BY THE CIA. A FACT THAT THE CIA KEPT SECRET FROM THE WARREN COMMISSION, THE HOUSE SELECT COMMITTEE, -- HOUSE ELECT COMMITTEE, AND KEPT ALL THE WAY THROUGH 1990 FROM THE Assasination Records Review Board (ARRB).
AND THERE'S EVERYTHING INVOLVED WITH THE ASSASSINATION, THE AUTOPSY, THE REGIME CHANGES, BUT UNEXPLAINED THINGS LIKE WHY WOULD A COMMUNIST, A GENUINE COMMUNIST, JOIN THE MARINE CORPS AS PART OF AN ESTABLISHMENT THAT HAS KILLED HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE IN NORTH KOREA? WHY WOULD A GENUINE COMMUNIST JOIN AN ORGANIZATION WHERE HE MIGHT BE DEPLOYED AT ANY MOMENT TO GO KILL COMMUNISTS? INDEED, WHY WOULD A COMMUNIST, A GENUINE COMMUNIST, WANT TO KILL A PRESIDENT WHO Just PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED TO THE WORLD THAT HE WANTED TO ESTABLISH PEACEFUL RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE COMMUNIST WORLD, AND ELECT A VICE PRESIDENT WHOSE POLICIES MIRRORED THE ONES OF THE PENTAGON AND CIA.
THINGS WERE BACK TO NORMAL, VIETNAM RAMPED UP, 58,000 American men are killed there. American forces are defeated, THE COMMUNISTs DID NOT FALL -- THE DOMINOES DID NOT FALL, THE, KNOWS -- COMMUNISTS DID NOT COME TO GET US, The Cold War ends, but we do not get our Constitutional Republic back the way they had promised when the established the National Security State. AND THEY STARTED POKING HORNET'S NESTs -- HORNETS NESTS IN THE PERSIAN GULF WAR, THEY KILLED HUNDREDS OF CHILDREN IN IRAQ WITH THE SANCTIONS, AND WE GOT THE INEVITABLE TERRORIST RETALIATION Operation, that WAS USED -- RETALIATION THAT WAS USED AS A MEANS TO DATA ROCK. DEATH, DESTRUCTION, Forever WARS, AND EVERY INCREASE IN SPENDING AND DEBT THAT HAS SENT OUR NATION INTO BANKRUPTCY. THIS IS NOT THE GOVERNMENT THAT OUR FRAMERS AND THE FOUNDING FATHERS IN OUR AMERICAN ANCESTORS INTENDED TO BRING INTO EXISTENCE. IF THEY WERE TOLD THIS IS THE KIND OF GOVERNMENT, THE KIND THAT WOULD ASSASSINATE AMERICANS WITH IMPUNITY, THE POWER TO TORTURE AMERICANS, TO DETAIN THEM UNLAWFULLY -- THEY NEVER WOULD HAVE CALLED -- CONFIRMED THE CONSTITUTION.
WHAT IS THE SOLUTION TO THIS? IT SEEMS THAT THE SOLUTION IS OBVIOUS. IT IS NOT A MATTER OF GETTING BETTER PEOPLE IN PUBLIC OFFICE. IT IS A STRUCTURAL PROBLEM. THE STRUCTURE OF GOVERNMENT PROBLEM. WHAT WE NEED TO DO AS AMERICANS IS RAISE OUR VISION TO A HIGHER LEVEL, AND EXAMINE THE PRINCIPLES ON WHICH THIS COUNTRY WAS FOUNDED. THE PRINCIPLES IN THAT DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, OF LIFE, LIBERTY, AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS, AND THE LEGITIMATE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT AS A CONSTITUTIONALLY LIMITED GOVERNMENT REPUBLIC. IF WE CAN RESTORE THAT AND DISMANTLE THIS TOTALITARIAN STRUCTURE KNOWN AS THE NATIONAL SECURITY STATE, RESTORE OUR ORIGINAL PRINCIPLES OF LIBERTY AND FREE MARKETS AND LIMITED GOVERNMENT -- LIMITED GOVERNMENT , THAT IS THE WAY WE LEAD THE WORLD TO THE HIGHEST REACHES OF FREEDOM THAT MANKIND IS EVER SEEN. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [APPLAUSE] THANK YOU. >>
JH (Moderator): THANK YOU. James DiEugneio WAS THE AUTHOR and Editor OF THREE BOOKS ON THE ASSASSINATIONS IN THE 60'S. They are The Second Edition of Destiny Betrayed in 2012, RECLAIMING PARKLAND, in 2016, AND THE ASSASSINATIONS IN 2003. FOR SEVEN YEARS, FROM 1993-2000, JIM WAS ALSO THE COEDITOR OF WHAT MANY CONSIDERED THE FINEST JOURNALISTS ON THE SUBJECTS -- PRObe MAGAZINE. FROM 2003-2016, HE EDITED THE WEBSITE CITIZENS for TRUTH ABOUT THE KENNEDY ASSASSINATION, AND TODAY IS THE EDITOR AND PUBLISHER OF THE GREAT WEBSITE KENNEDYS AND KING.COM. that I highly recommend. THE TITLE OF HIS TALK IS VIETNAM DECLASSIFIED,Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon. PLEASE WELCOME OUR NEXT SPEAKER. [APPLAUSE] >>
JD: THANK YOU, JACOB. IT IS GREAT WHEN YOU GET TO WRITE YOUR OWN INTRODUCTION. [LAUGHTER] ALL RIGHT -- >> ALL RIGHT. BEFORE I GET STARTED ON THE MAIN TOPIC, I WOULD LIKE TO TALK FOR A MINUTE OR TWO ABOUT WHAT HAS BEEN DECLASSIFIED ABOUT THE CIA ASSASSINATION PLOTS AGAINST CASTRO, ALL RIGHT? THE IG REPORT , WHICH WAS DECLASSIFIED BY THE ARrB, SAID THERE WAS NO JFK OR RFK INVOLVEMENT OR AUTHORIZATION OF THOSE PLOTS. THEY DELIVER THE KEPT THEM FROM THE KENNEDYS. THE Church COMMITTEE CAME TO THE SAME CONCLUSION WHEN J EDGAR HOOVER BRIEFED RFK ON THE PLOTS FOR THE FIRST TIME, HE (rfk) SAID HE GOT REALLY UPSET WHEN HE HEARD ABOUT THIS STUFF. HE DEMANDED A CIA BRIEFING, AND THE CIA BRIEFER SAID THE LONGER WE TALK, THE MORE HE GROUND HIS TEETH INTO HIS JOB. HE THEN CALLED IN RICHARD HOLMES , AND BASICALLY READ HIM THE RIOT ACT. DURING THE CHURCH COMMITTEE HEARINGS, WHEN A HeLMES WAS ASKED ABOUT THIS, HE CONVENIENTLY FORGOT THE MEETING. SO THE BRIEFERS SAID WAIT A SECOND, HERE IS OUR CASE APPOINTMENT BOOK. ISN'T THAT YOUR NAME RIGHT THERE? ISN'T THAT THE TIME YOU WERE THERE? AND YOU STILL DO NOT MEMBER WHAT HE TOLD YOU? YOU CAN DO THAT STUFF AFTER SOMEBODY IS DEAD.
THE CIA THEN LIED TO BOBBY KENNEDY AND SAID THE PLOTS WERE OVER, WHEN THEY WERE ACTUALLY ONGOING AT THE VERY TIME OF THE BRIEFING, AND THEY KNEW IT. ALL RIGHT? NOW, THIS IS 50 YOURS -- 54 YEARS AFTER THE JFK ASSASSINATION. IF SOMEONE MADE AN INCREDIBLE CASE THAT CASTRO KILLED KENNEDY, I SOMEHOW MISSED IT AND I HAVE BEEN DOING THIS FOR 30 YEARS. I THINK THAT 54 Years IS BEYOND THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS. IF YOU CANNOT MAKE YOUR CASE AND 54 YEARS, I THINK YOU DO NOT HAVE ONE. ALL RIGHT? [APPLAUSE] >>
OK, BEFORE I GET STARTED, THE LAST 3.1/2 YEARS I HAVE SPENT IN MY LIFE STUDYING KENNEDY'S FOREIGN POLICY OUTSIDE OF VIETNAM AND CUBA, BECAUSE HE DID NOT -- I STUDIED THINGS LIKE THE MIDDLE EAST, EGYPT, AFRICA, INDONESIA. I CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT YOU CANNOT LOOK AT VIETNAM OR CUBA ISOLATED. Because KENNEDY HAD A FOREIGN POLICY THE DAY HE WAS INAUGURATED. AND AS HE GOES ON, YOU CAN SEE IT MANIFEST ITSELF. EVERYTHING HAD A PLACE. BUT THE REASON I GOT BACK TO VIETNAM IS BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF DOCUMENTS CLASSIFIED ABOUT THESE OTHER TWO GUYS. ONE WAY YOU FIND OUT ABOUT A PRESIDENT IS NOT JUST QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS, IT IS by COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS. HOW DOES HE COMPARE WITH THE GUYS WHO CAME BEFORE HIM, AND HOW DOES HE COMPARE TO THE GUYS YOU CAME AFTER? -- WHO CAME AFTER.
THESE ARE THE MOST CURRENT NUMBERS I COULD FIND. THIS IS BASED UPON A 2008 BRITISH STUDY. THE NUMBER ON THE LEFT IS THE MILITARY, THE NUMBER ON THE RIGHT IS THE TOTAL. (Graphic – Casualties: Total Dead U.S., North and South Vietnamese, Civilian and Military: 1,291,435 - 4,211,451) CIVILIAN AND MILITARY. If you throw in CAMBODIA, WHICH I THINK YOU HAVE TO, AT ANOTHER mILLION -- ADD ANOTHER MILLION. IT IS THE GREATEST FOREIGN POLICY AMERICAN DISASTER OF THE 20TH CENTURY. I DO NOT THINK THERE IS ANYTHING ELSE THAT COMES CLOSE.
I PARTICULARLY LIKE THAT IMAGE, BECAUSE IT CONVEYS WHAT THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA, THEIR PICTURE OF VIETNAM FOR ABOUT 20 YEARS, THAT THE GUYS IN THE STATE DEPARTMENT, THE EASTERN ELITISTS , GOT TOGETHER WITH THE WHIZ KIDS IN THE DEFENSE DEPARTMENT AND WE PLUNGED INTO THIS INEVITABLE TRAGEDY. WELL, SOMETHING HAPPENED TO SCREW UP THAT IMAGE. THAT WAS ONE DAY MR. X MET MR. GARRISON AT A PARK BENCH IN WASHINGTON. And MR. X, (Fletcher Prouty) HE SAID IN THE FALL OF 1963, I WAS WORKING ON KENNEDY'S WITHDRAWAL PLAN FROM VIETNAM. THAT WAS A 1000 MAN WITHDRAWAL AT THE END OF THE YEAR, AND ALL OF THE OTHER ADVISORS COME BACK BY 1955. THERE WAS A SERIOUS PROBLEM -- 1965. THERE WAS A SERIOUS PROBLEM WITH WHAT HE WAS SAYING, THAT IT WAS A VIOLATION of Halen’s Spheres.
DANA HALEN WAS A HISTORIAN WHO WROTE A WONDERFUL BOOK, WHERE HE STUDIED SEVEN YEARS OF NEWS STORIES ON THE VIETNAM WAR. HE CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THIS IS THE WAY THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA WORKS. YOU HAVE INSIDE THE CIRCLE, THIS IS CONVENTIONAL WISDOM, THE ACCEPTED STORY. EVEN IF IT IS FALSE, BECAUSE LYNDON JOHNSON LIED HIS EYES OUT ABOUT THE GULF OF TONKIN, BUT THEY REPORTED IT AS IF IT WAS TRUE. IT WAS THE ACCEPTED STORY BY THE REPORTERS.
AND THEN HE SAID OUTSIDE THAT, YOU HAVE AN AREA OF DEBATE. HE SAID SOMETHING LIKE THE INVASION OF CAMBODIA WOULD BE SOMETHING -- GET THE TWO TALKING HEADS, LEFT, RIGHT, WHATEVER, AND THEY TALK ABOUT WHETHER THE CAMBODIAN INVASION WAS GOOD OR NOT. BUT HE SAID -- AND THIS IS HIS MOST IMPORTANT DISCOVERY -- THERE IS AN AREA OF DEVIANCE THAT IS NOT ACCEPTED, EVEN IF IT IS TRUE. IT DOES NOT MATTER. YOU ARE NOT GETTING ANYWHERE WITH THAT STORY. THAT IS WHAT HAPPENED TO MY BUDDY MR. STONE WHEN HE PUT THIS IN HIS MOVIE.
SO WHAT HAPPENS? HE STARTS GETTING ATTACKED. HERE IS GEORGE LARDNER IN THE WASHINGTON POST, SEVEN MONTHS BEFORE THE MOVIE PREMIERES. TALKING ABOUT KILLING THE KID IN THE CRIB. THAT IS UNHEARD OF. GEORGE LArdNER MADE A VERY INTERESTING COMMENT IN HIS COLUMN. HE SAID THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE TO AN ABRUPT CHANGE BETWEEN KENNEDY AND JOHNSON ON VIETNAM. HE DID NOT SAY WHERE HE GOT THE INFORMATION. HE IS in THAT INNER CIRCLE. HE DOES NOT HAVE TO PROVE IT. -- IN THAT INNER CIRCLE. HE DOES NOT HAVE TO PROVE IT.
THIS WAS NOT BASED ON SOME FANTASY, IT WAS BASED UPON THIS (graphic of NSM 263 on screen). IT HAD BEEN DECLASSIFIED ONE YEAR BEFORE. HE HAD IT, BECAUSE JOHN NEWMAN WAS A TECHNICAL ADVISOR ON THE MOVIE. HE WAS ABOUT TO PUBLISH HIS REVOLUTIONARY BOOK "JFK IN VIETNAM," AND Fletecher Prouty HAD WORKED ON THIS PLAN. I DO NOT KNOW HOW ANY PEOPLE KNOW THIS, BUT THE MCNAMARA TAYLOR REPORT, WHICH THIS IS BASED ON, WAS NOT WRITTEN BY MCNAMARA AND TAYLOR. IT WAS WRITTEN IN WASHINGTON by Prouty and Krulak in Washington. UNDER THE DIRECT SUPERVISION OF ROBERT KENNEDY, UNDER THE REQUEST OF President KENNEDY BECAUSE THEY DID NOT TRUST HIM TO BRING BACK THE INFORMATION HE NEEDED TO BEGIN WITH THE WITHDRAWAL. WHEN THEY GOT IT IN HAWAII, IT WAS ALREADY BOUND. THEY JETTED IN AND READ IT ON THE WAY IN.
THE FIRESTORM ABOUT THIS MOVIE CAUSED EVERYBODY TO CREATE THE ARrB. IN MY OPINION, ONE OF THE MOST SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT DOCUMENTS, IF I HAD TO PUT TOGETHER A TOP 10, THIS WOULD BE IN THERE, IS THE RECORD OF THe SecDef CONFERENCE MAY 1963. THAT WAS WHEN MCNAMARA WOULD BRING IN ALL OF THESE GUYS FROM VIETNAM INTO HONOLULU, THE CIA, AND WOULD GET A STATUS REPORT. YOU SAID THIS ONE WAS NOT GETTING A STATUS REPORT. HE WAS GETTING A PROGRESS REPORT. KENNEDY HAD ALREADY STARTED THE WITHDRAWAL PROGRAM. MACK CAMERA -- MCNAMARA WAS A GUY WHO IS DOING IT. AT THIS MEETING, HE IS CHECKING ON THESE WITHDRAWAL SCHEDULES. WE WILL TURN THIS THING OVER TO VIETNAMESE. WE ARE GETTING OUT OF HERE. ONCE HE GETS ALL THE SCHEDULES, DO YOU KNOW WHAT HE SAYS? TOO SLOW. WE HAVE TO SPEED IT UP.
I DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO GO INTO WHY HE SAID THAT, BUT THAT IS WHAT HE SAID. NOW, THIS EVIDENCE WAS SO POWERFUL THAT IT KNOCKED OVER Halen SPheres, WHICH WAS AN UNBELIEVABLE EVENT. WHAT HAPPENED. THE NEW YORK TIMES SAID KENNEDY HAD A WITHDRAWAL PLAN. THE PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER SAID GUESS WHAT? THE WASHINGTON POST DID NOT SAY ANYTHING. THE BEST WAY TO DENY YOUR DEFEAT IS TO NOT SAY ANYTHING. NOW, THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA RELIED A LOT UPON David Halberstam’s 1972 BOOK (The Best and the Brightest) -- THIS 1972 BOOK, A MASSIVE BESTSELLER, 1.8 MILLION COPIES.
THIS IS WHERE THE IDEA OF THE INEVITABLE TRAGEDY, SOMETHING WE COULD HAVE AVOIDED. TODAY, THIS IS WHAT HE SAYS. THIS IS HOW MCNAMARA GOT TAGGED WITH IT BEING HIS War. THE NEXT PAGE, HE WRITES THAT MCNAMARA HAD NO DIFFERENT ASSUMPTIONS AND THE PENTAGON DID -- THEN THE PENTAGON DID. IF YOU ARE ASKING THE PENTAGON TO GET OUT OF VIETNAM, I THINK YOU HAVE DIFFERENT IDEAS THAN WHAT THE PENTAGON DID. OBVIOUSLY HE DID NOT DO ENOUGH DIGGING, OR HE WAS TALKING TO THE WRONG PEOPLE. THERE WERE A LOT OF PEOPLE DOING A LOT OF CYA WHEN HE IS WRITING THIS BOOK. HERE IS SOME MORE EVIDENCE. EVIDENCE THAT THIS WAS MCNAMARA'S WITHDRAWAL PLAN.
THIS IS A CONVERSATION BETWEEN TAYLOR, KENNEDY, BUNDY, AND MCNAMARA. OCTOBER 2, HE IS DESCRIBING THE WITHDRAWAL PLAN RIGHT THERE. BUNDY SAYS WHAT IS THE POINT OF DOING IT? THAT IS THE IMPORTANT PART OF THIS CONVERSATION, WHICH I WILL RETURN TO. I DO NOT SEE HOW MUCH CLEARER YOU CAN GET THAN THAT? SO YOU HAVE NCM 263, The SecDef MEETING, YOU HAVE THIS MEETING, BUT GEORGE LARDner AND KNOWS BETTER.
THE TAKEAWAY LINE IS THE MIDDLE ONE. WHY IS THAT SO IMPORTANT? BECAUSE WHEN MONDAY READ THIS, -- BUNDY READ THIS, HE WAS PREPARING A BOOK CALLED LESSONS IN DISASTER. HE READ THIS, AND HE SAYS I THINK I KNOW WHAT HAPPENED. KENNEDY KNEW THAT I WAS TOO MUCH OF A HAWK ON VIETNAM, AND DID NOT TRUST ME TO DO THIS. SO hE WENT TO MCNAMARA TO IMPLEMENT THE WITHDRAWAL PLAN. WE KNOW THAT FOR A FACT TODAY BECAUSE KENNEDY WAS VERY UPSET IN NOVEMBER 1961, WHEN THE BIG TWO-WEEK DEBATE TOOK PLACE IN THE WHITE HOUSE ABOUT WHETHER WE ARE GOING INTO VIETNAM OR NOT. HE WAS ESSENTIALLY THE ONLY GUY SAYING NO. AND he SAID YOU GUYS, WHY ARE YOU COMPARING THIS TO KOREA? IT IS NOT KOREA. THIS IS NOT AN AGGRESSION FROM NORTH KOREA TO THE SOUTH, THIS IS A CIVIL WAR. YOU DO NOT WANT TO GET IN THE MIDDLE OF SOMETHING LIKE THIS.
SO HE WENT AHEAD AND HE John Kenneth Galbraith TO GO TO SAIGON AND WRITE A REPORT, BECAUSE HE KNEW WHAT HE WOULD COME UP WITH. THEY COME UP AND HIS TYPICAL WRITING SAYS WHAT THE HECK ARE YOU DOING IN THIS COUNTRY? THERE IS NO WAY WE WILL WIN THIS THING. AND SO HE THEN CALLS Galbraith IN IN APRIL AND SAYS I WANT YOU TO GIVE THAT REPORT TO MCNAMARA AND TELL HIM I TOLD YOU, OK? SO HE IS ONE WITNESS. Rowsell KIRKPATRICK, MCNAMARA'S ASSISTANT is another witness, he SAID MCNAMARA TOLD HIM THAT KENNEDY GAVE HIM ORDERS TO WIND DOWN THE WAR. JOHN McNaughton, ANOTHER MCNAMARA ASSISTANT, SAID THE SAME THING. AND I HAVE ALREADY TOLD YOU ABOUT BuNDY. UNFORTUNATELY, HE PASSED AWAY BEFORE THE BOOK WAS FINISHED -- BUNDY. UNFORTUNATELY, HE PASSED AWAY BEFORE THE BOOK WAS FINISHED.
WHAT HAPPENS AFTER KENNEDY'S ASSASSINATION? THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS. JOHNSON IS THE NEW SHERIFF IN TOWN, AND HE MAKES IT VERY CLEAR -- TO MCNAMARA THAT HE DOES NOT LIKE WHAT HE WAS DOING. CUTS MCNAMARA OFF, AND THAT IS THE KEY STATEMENT AT THE BOTTOM. IF YOU READ THAT, YOU CANNOT COUNT ON A WAR YOU ARE LOSING. TO KENNEDY, SOUTH VIETNAM WAS PART OF NATIONAL SECURITY INTEREST IN THE UNITED STATES. WITH JOHNSON, IT WAS. IT WAS A PART OF IT. WE CANNOT LOSE TO THE COMMIES, NO MATTER WHERE IT IS. AND MCNAMARA SHOULD HAVE QUIT RIGHT AFTER THAT, BECAUSE TWO WEEKS LATER, THIS IS REALLY AMAZING, JOHNSON WANTS HIM TO WRITE A MEMORANDUM SAYING THAT “YOU DID NOT REALLY MEAN THOSE THINGS YOU SAID BACK IN OCTOBER 1963”, EVEN THOUGH IT IS ALL RIGHT THERE IN BLACK AND WHITE. HE WANTS HIM TO TAKE IT ALL BACK, BECAUSE WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE, OF COURSE, IS THAT JOHNSON REALIZES HE IS BREAKING WITH KENNEDY'S POLICY, AND HE WANTS TO BLUR THE LINE.
WHAT HAPPENS IS THAT THE KENNEDY hOLdOVERS IN THE WHITE HOUSE, THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT HE IS DOING. SO THERE IS A MEETING at Roland Evan’s house, JOHNSON GETS WIND OF IT, AND HE SAYS THESE GUYS ARE SAYING THAT I'M PUTTING THE VIETNAM WAR ON KENNEDY, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT HE WAS DOING. BUT HE DOES NOT WANT ANYBODY TO REALIZE THAT.
SO WHAT HAPPENS, OF COURSE, IS THAT ONE BY ONE, ALL OF THESE GUYS START QUITTING. AND MCNAMARA IS THE LAST GUY TO LEAVE. AND SOMEHOW THE PRESS DOES NOT REALIZE THIS. THE VIETNAM WAR IS SPINNING OUT OF CONTROL, AND ALL OF THESE GUYS ARE LEAVING THE WHITE HOUSE. MAYBE IT IS BECAUSE THEY DO NOT AGREE WITH WHAT JOHNSON IS DOING. AND SO THEN O'DONNELL AND POWERS , AND THEY MAKE IT EXPLICIT IN THis BOOK. THEY SPENT ABOUT SEVEN PAGES GOING OVER THIS. JOHNSON'S VIETNAM POLICY WAS NOT KENNEDY'S VIETNAM POLICY, AND THEY ACTUALLY DISCUSS NCM 263, AND SAY JOHNSON REVERSED IT, WHICH IS WHAT HE DID.
NOW RICHARD NIXON ALWAYS USED TO SAY I AM NOT GOING TO BLAME VIETNAM ON KENNEDY AND JOHNSON. [LAUGHTER] >> LIKE THAT IS HOW WE GOT THERE. THIS IS HOW WE GOT THERE. THESE ARE THE four GUYS WHO GOT US INTO VIETNAM. THE DULLES BROTHERS, IKE, AND RICHARD NIXON. IT IS VERY SIMPLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT THEY BEGIN TO SUBVERT THE -- GENEVA ACCORDS THAT ended THE FIRST FRENCH INDOCHINA WAR. THEY MADE UP A COUNTRY CALLED SOUTH VIETNAM, WHICH DID NOT EXIST, THEY MADE THE 17TH PARALLEL PERMANENt, WHICH WAS NEVER SUPPOSED TO BE, AND THEY GOT RID OF THE FRENCH STAND-IN Bao Dai, AND PUT IN THEIR own STAND-IN Diem. THAT IS HOW WE GOT INTO THIS THING.
WHENEVER I READ THIS, IT REALLY STUNS ME. NO MATTER HOW MANY YEARS IT GOES BY. COULD ANYBODY BE MORE WRONG THAN THIS? Dien Bien Phu WAS A BLESSING IN DISGUISE. IT TAKES THE CAKE FOR EASTERN ESTABLISHMENT ARROGANCE.
BUT BEFORE Dien BIEN-FU FELL, THEY WERE GOING TO BAIL OUT THE BESIEGED FRENCH GARRISON WITH OPERATION vulture, WHICH WAS IN A MASSIVE AIR -- VULTURE, WHICH WAS A MASSIVE AIR ARMADA which included THREE ATOMIC BoMbS.
WHEN EISENHOWER VETOED IT, HE TRIED TO GIVE THE BOMBS TO THE FRENCH THEMSELVES, AND HE SAID WeLL WAIT A SECOND. IF WE USE THESE THINGS WE WILL BLOW UP OUR GUYS AT THE SAME TIME WE BLOW UP THEM. FORGET IT. WE DO NOT WANT ANY PART OF THIS THING. RICHARD NIXON IS ACTUALLY THE FIRST GUY, I could find, TO ACTUALLY ADVOCATE FOR ENTERING AMERICAN COMBAT TROOPS INTO VIETNAM. HE ACTUALLY SAID THIS DURING THE SIEGE of Dien Bien Phu. IF THE FRENCH LOSE, WE SHOULD GO AHEAD AND COMMIT AMERICANS, BECAUSE IT WILL BE ANOTHER DISASTER -- AN UTTER DISASTER. THE SOUTH VIETNAMESE peasants are a major PRESENCE and S. Vietnam is POWERFUL COUNTRY. THEY WILL TAKE THE PHILIPPINES, Indonesia, AUSTRALIA, AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
WHEN OLIVER STONE MADE THIS MOVIE, THIS MOVIE ABOUT NIXON, AT THE TIME HE MADE THIS, WHICH WAS 1994 HE STARTED OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT -- >> 1994. >> OK. WHEN NIXON LEFT OFFICE. At that time, very few people know this, HIS BudDY, JERRY FORD, ACTUALLY GAVE HIM CONTROL OVER his papers and TAPES. HE COULD INCINERATE THEM IF YOU WANTED TO.
WHEN CONGRESS HEARD ABOUT THIS, THEY SAID IT WAS OUTRAGEOUS. HE HAD TO RESIGN. SO THEY PASS A LAW SAYING THAT THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES WOULD TAKE CONTROL. NIXON DID NOT LIKE THAT. SO HE HIRED A WHOLE FLEET OF LAWYERS TO FIGHT THAT DECISION UNTIL THE DAY HE DIED. WHEN HE STARTS THIS MOVIE, HE ONLY HAS 3% OF THE AUDIOTAPES AND 15% OF THE PAPERS HAVE BEEN DECLASSIFIED. THIS IS 20 YEARS AFTER Nixon LEFT OFFICE.
SO now I WILL SHOW YOU NOW WHY NIXON DID THAT. I WOULD HAVE DONE THE SAME THING. AND WHY THE WAY, DID YOU KNOW HENRY KISSINGER WAS A MOVIE CRITIC? [LAUGHTER] >> TAKE A LOOK. THE L.A. TIMES LET HIM REVIEW OLIVER STONE'S MOVIE, IT IS LIKE JIM GARRISON -- JIM GARRISON REVIEWING JFK.
When Nixon gets into office Kissinger PASSes around THE STUDY REFERENDUM. EVERYBODY RESPONDS TO IT, INCLUDING ABRAMS (Who was a replacement for Westmoreland). THEY ALL SAID THIS IS HOPELESS. THIS IS A STALEMATE. BUT YET, NIXON STILL EXPANDS THE WAR, WAY BEYOND WHAT JOHNSON WAS DOING, AND HE STARTS CARPET BOMBING CAMBODIA AND INVADES BOTH COUNTRIES. WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THAT? BECAUSE HE HAD LEARNED AT THE FOOT OF JOHN FOSTER DuLLeS -- JOHN FOSTER DULLES, WHO CALLED IT THE UNCERTAINTY PRINCIPLE. HE CALLED AT THE MAN MAN THEORY. IF YOU DO ENOUGH IRRATIONAL STUFF, AND UNPREDICTABLE STUFF, THE OTHER SIDE WILL JUST GIVE IN. EXCEPT IT WAS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN THIS TIME.
KISSINGER HAD THIS GREAT QUOTE. IT IS ALWAYS GREAT WHEN YOU GET IT ON TAPE, BECAUSE YOU CANNOT DENY HE SAID THIS IDIOTIC STUFF, YOU KNOW? FOR THE FIRST TIME -- THIS WAS THE GROWING PROBLEM THOUGH. FOR THE LONGER THE WAR WENT ON, THE MORE THE ARMY DISINTEGRATED. COLONEL ROBERT HeinL WROTE AN ARTICLE IN 1971, EXAMINING THE PHENOMENON OF FRAGging. IN HIS MOVIE, YOU COULD JUSTIFY WHAT CHARLIE SHEEN DID. THESE ARE GUYS WHO ARE NOT GOING TO BE ORDERED ANYMORE. 500 CASES IN THREE YEARS. HOW CAN YOU RUN AN ARMY WHEN THAT MANY PEOPLE ARE MUTINYING? SOME PILOTS REFUSED TO FLY BECAUSE THE Soviets are suppling the VIETNAMESE With VERY Sophisticated ANTIAIRCRAFT EQUIPMENT.
HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE READ THIS BOOK? (Kill Anything That Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam, by Nick Turse) MEANWHILE, IT WAS THE BIGGEST EXAMPLE OF WHAT HAPPENED TO CIVILIANS IN VIETNAM. THERE WERE MANY, MANY OTHER CASES, SMALLER SCALE, WHICH HAPPENED THAT THE PENTAGON DECIDED TO EITHER D6 THE DOCUMENTS OR NOT BRING CHARGES AGAINST THE MILITARY OFFICERS. NOW, I HAD THE UNFORTUNATE EXPERIENCE OF READING THIS BOOK. [LAUGHTER] >> SEE, THIS BOOK COULD ONLY BE WRITTEN IN SECRECY. IT COULD NEVER HAVE BEEN WRITTEN WITH THE DECLASSIFIED RECORD. HE SAYS IN THERE THAT NEITHER HIM OR KISSINGER EVER SERIOUSLY CONSIDERED BOMBING OR USING ATOMIC WEAPONS. WELL, WE HAVE KISSINGER'S ASSISTANT WHO SAID HE DID THINK OF USING ATOMIC WEAPONS, for interdiction purposes, AT THE CHINESE PASS. BUT HERE IS ANOTHER AUDIOTAPE DURING THE EASTER OFFENSIVE, WHEN THE NORTH IS THREATENING TO TAKE OVER. [NO AUDIO] [LAUGHTER] >> (Graphic on screen “During Easter Break” Nixon: Should be take the Dikes out now? Kissinger: That will Drown 200,000 people. Nixon: Well No I would rather use a nuclear bomb. Have you got one ready?)
DOES IT GET ANY WORSE THAN THAT? WHEN KISSINGER HAS TO HEAD YOU OFF -- WHERE ARE YOU COMING FROM THEN? [LAUGHTER] >> ALL RIGHT. NOW, NIXON HAD COME TO THIS CONCLUSION EVEN EARLIER iN 1968, THAT THERE WAS NO WAY TO WIN THE WAR. SO WHAT HAPPENED IS THEY THEN DECIDED ON THE DECENT INTERVAL STRATEGY. WHAT THIS WAS IS THAT SAIGON CAN FALL, BUT OUR GUYS CANNOT BE THERE WHEN IT HAPPENS. WE HAVE TO HAVE AN INTERVAL BETWEEN US LEAVING AND SAIGON COLLAPSING, AND BY THE WAY, KISSINGER EVEN WROTE THIS IN A BRIEFING BOOK WITH THE CHINESE, BECAUSE IT IS WHAT HE TOLD THE CHINESE. Who are THE CHINESE GOING TO TELL? THEY'RE GOING TO TELL THE NORTH VIETNAMESE.
WHY? WHY DID HE DEMAND A DECENT INTERVAL? NIXON REFUSED TO BE THE FIRST PRESIDENT TO LOSE A WAR. SORT OF LIKE JOHNSON'S RATIONALE ALSO. WE CANNOT LET THIS FOURTH-GRADE COUNTRY DEFEAT THE UNITED STATES. -- THIRD-RATE COUNTRY DEFEAT THE UNITED STATES. EVERYONE ARE MEMBERS THIS IMAGE, -- MEMBERS THIS IMAGE, (line of Vietnamese waiting to board a helicopter to flee to the U.S., at CIA HQ in Saigon) RIGHT? THAT EVENING, HENRY KISSINGER CALLED UP AN OLD FRIEND FROM THE ACADEMIC CIRCLES, AND SAID WE SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN THERE. TRUE, BUT YOU GOT THERE A LITTLE LATE, HENRY. THIS GUY SAID THIS IN 1952. (Photo of a young JFK) NO AMOUNT OF AMERICAN MILITARY ASSISTANCE IN INDOCHINA CAN CONQUER AN ENEMY WHICH IS EVERYWHERE AND AT THE SAME TIME NOWHERE. AN ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE, WHICH HAS A SYMPATHY AND COVERT SUPPORT OF THE PEOPLE. 35 YEARS OLD. THERE IS YOUR FOREIGN POLICY VISIONARY, AND THERE HAS NOT BEEN ANYBODY LIKE HIM IN THE WHITE HOUSE AND I DO NOT THINK THERE WILL BE. [APPLAUSE] >>
JH (Moderator): SET UP HERE ON THE SITE. -- A TABLE HERE ON THE SIDE. >> OK. >> THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE] >> [INDISCEvcRNIBLE] >> OK, THE RIGHT BACK. -- BE RIGHT BACK. [INDISCERNIBLE CONVERSATIONS] >>
Meeting adjourns for a few minutes
JH (Moderator): ALL RIGHT, WE ARE READY TO GET STARTED AGAIN. OLIVER STONE, THE HOLLYWOOD PRODUCER AND DIRECTOR RECEIVED AN ACADEMY AWARD FOR BEST DIRECTOR FOR HIS WAR DRAMA "THE TUNE," WHICH RECEIVED THE BEST PICTURE AWARD -- "PLATOON," WHICH RECEIVED THE BEST PICTURE AWARD. HIS OTHER MOVIES INCLUDE "WALL STREET," "NATURAL BORN KILLERS," AND THE MOST RECENT MOVIE, "SNOWDEN." HE ALSO PRODUCED AND DIRECTED MANY DOCUMENTARIES, INCLUDING SHOWTIME'S "UNTOLD HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES" AND IN 1991 DIRECT IN THE MOVIE "JFK," STARRING DONALD SUTHERLAND, BASED ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT THE U.S. GOVERNMENT ORCHESTRATED THE ASSASSINATION OF JFK. THIS LED TO THE DECLASSIFICATION OF A NUMBER OF RECORDS. AND HE HAS PUT TOGETHER WHAT PROMISES TO BE A FANTASTICALLY INTERESTING, FASCINATING DOCUMENTARY THAT CONSISTS OF A FOUR-PART SERIES COMING OUT ON JUNE 12, THAT IS A FOUR-PART, ONE-HOUR SERIES ON SHOWTIME, NIGHT AFTER NIGHT, IN WHICH OLIVER STONE INTERVIEWS VLADIMIR PUTIN. The format is going to be OLIVER STONE IS GOING TO GIVE US SOME PRELIMINARY COMMENTS, AND THEN WILL BE SEATED FOR A CONVERSATION WITH JIM, WHICH I WILL MODERATE. PLEASE WELCOME OLIVER STONE. [APPLAUSE]
OS: MR. STONE: THANK YOU. I AM VERY HAPPY THAT JIM COULD BE HERE. I SPECIFICALLY ASKED JACOB TO BRING HIM, BECAUSE THERE ARE MANY GOOD BOOKS, BUT ASIDE RECENTLY FROM THE JAMES DOUGLAS BOOK, I'M A BIG FAN OF JIM'S BOOK. TERRIBLE TITLE, BUT IT IS CALLED -- [LAUGHTER] >> "RECLAIMING PARKlland. " MR. STONE: HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE READ IT? JUST CURIOUS. A MINORITY, CERTAINLY. IT IS A WELL-DONE BOOK, AND IT IS SO IMPORTANT THAT IT REMINDS US AFTER SO MANY YEARS, HE IS A THIRD-GENERATION RESEARCHER, I GUESS YOU WOULD CALL IT. 3, 3 AND A HALF. RECLAIMING HEARTLAND, THE REASON -- RECLAIMING PARkLAND, HE WAS GETTING READY FOR THIS HUGE PUBLIC REACTION TO THE MOVIE. HE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE THE ANTIDOTE TO JFK, AND HE WANTED TO CUT THAT OFF BECAUSE HE KNEW A LOT ABOUT THAT MOVIE, AND KNEW A LOT ABOUT PARKLAND, THE HOSPITAL. IT WAS THE WRONG TITLE, AND THE PUBLISHERS TRIED, BUT NOTHING DOING. I KEEP MENTIONING. WE ARE GOING TO GET IT REPUBLISHED IN THE SPRING, I THINK. I'M WORKING ON IT. THE SAME PUBLISHER WHO IS DOING THE PUT AND INTERVIEWS AS WELL AS SNOWDEN. -- TO -- PUTIN INTERVIEWS AS WELL AS SNOWDEN.
Jim in his book goes into,the primary evidence, actual material that everybody forgets, what actually happened on that day as seen by the participants. IT IS THE MOST CONVINCING ARGUMENT THAT THERE WAS NOT IN FACT ONE IOTA OF THAT EVIDENCE THAT HOLDS UP. IT WAS FROM THE BEGINNING, THE CLUES WERE THERE, BUT THERE WAS NO COMPUTER TO DO OUR WORK FOR US. THE CLUES WERE THERE, AND THEY MISSED IT. PERHAPS MARK LANE MIGHT HAVE SEEN IT. IT IS SO DIFFICULT TO ARGUE WHEN PEOPLE HAVE SEEN MARTIANS IN THE ROOM OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. YOU CANNOT ARGUE. THIS WHOLE THING COMES FROM THE BASIC MISCONCEPTION, AND JIM TRACES THE MISCONCEPTION SO BEAUTIFULLY. PLEASE READ IT. IT IS WELL WORTH IT. PEOPLE CARE, AND THEY STILL CARE. AS WE COME TO THIS MOMENT IN 19 -- WHERE ARE WE -- 2017, I STUMBLED INTO THIS WITH ELLEN RAY IN CUBA, HAVANA. SHE WAS A GREAT PERSON, AND HER HUSBAND. BILL, BILL SCHAAP. WHAT WONDERFUL PEOPLE. SHE GAVE ME THIS BOOK. JIM GARRISON'S TRIAL, COVERED IN 60 -- 1967, 1968. SHE GAVE IT TO ME IN AN ELEVATOR. I HAVE TO LISTEN TO THIS LUNATIC TELLING ME GERSON, GARRISON. I TAKE THE BOOK, "ON THE TRAIL OF THE ASSASSINS. "
I READ IT ABOUT 3, 4 MONTHS LATER AND IT IS A HELL OF A THRILLER. THAT IS WHERE IT STARTS (like a Costa-Gavras film). YOU GET DEEPER AND DEEPER UNTIL THE HONEYPOT COMES UP AND GRABS YOU. IT IS ELABORATE, A MAZE, A DELIGHT AS A MYSTERY FAN, BUT THE DEEPER YOU GO IT BECOMES CLEAR THAT THERE IS A HUGE, HUGE MISS DOING -- MISS DOING IN THE MANNER. AS THE YEARS GO BY, I FEEL THAT MORE AND MORE STRONGLY, AS EVEN AS I SEE THE WORLD TODAY AND THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT. EVERYTHING THAT WE HAD WITH THIS CRAZY ELECTION IN 2000, AND SEVERAL MORE CRAZY ELECTIONS CULMINATING RIGHT NOW. BUT AS WE HAVE COME TO KNOW THE DEEP STATE -- WE DID NOT KNOW IT IN. IT IS SO APPARENT, AND SHOULD BE APPARENT TO EVERY AMERICAN WHO IS AWAKE, AND IT IS THAT THE MOST DANGEROUS POINT, WE ARE THERE. THE THREAT HAS BEEN LAID DOWN TO US, AND IF YOU CANNOT SEE THE MARKINGS OF THE SECRET STATE, THE INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES DOING THIS KIND OF LEAKING AND WORK BEHIND THE SCENES TO DESTROY THE CREDIBILITY OF THE RUSSIANS AS WELL AS THE PRESIDENT, WHO MANY OF THEM HATE. THIS IS AN INTERESTING GAME THAT IS GOING ON, A SIMILAR ONE to What Jim GARRISON RAN INTO IN 1969 at that trial when he prosecuted Clay Shaw in New Orleans..
THAT A LANE GRAVES PRESENTED ME WITH. -- THAT ELLEN RAY PRESENTED ME WITH. YOU CANNOT GO AGAINST A COVERT INTELLIGENCE APPARATUS LIKE THE CIA, (even back in 1969) BECAUSE NOBODY IN THE REAL WORLD UNDERSTANDS HOW THEY WORK, MANIPULATE, AND THEY HAVE A LOT OF MONEY AND A LOT OF MEDIA WITH THEM, CORPORATE MEDIA. I FEEL SORRY -- I LOVE JIM, BUT IT WAS HARD BECAUSE HE HAD A CASE AND, AS JIM KNOWS, IT WAS A CASE THAT WAS A MINIMUM TO GO TO COURT, BUT WHEN HE GOT TO COURT THREE YEARS IN, SO MANY PEOPLE WERE MISSING, DeAD, CHANGEd THEIR TESTIMONY -- DEAD, CHANGE THEIR TESTIMONY, AND THE CIA HAD AN ACTIVE FILE ON GARRISON TO DELEGITIMIZE HIM COMPLETELY.
MY GOAL IS TO MEET THIS MAN WHO HAD NEVER GIVEN UP FIGHTING, WRITTEN THIS NEW BOOK 20 YEARS AFTER THE TRIAL, AND BELIEVED IN THE RIGHT THING HE DID TO TURN HIS STORY INTO A SUCCESSFUL FILM THAT WAS SEEN ALL OVER THE WORLD , MUCH TO THE ire OF THE ORIGINAL PEOPLE, WHO HAD SPENT SO MUCH MONEY AND TIME DESTROYING HIS REPUTATION. I WAS THEM AND SIMPLY -- VENOMOUSLY ATTACKED BY MANY PEOPLE WHO WROTE ME NASTY PIECES. HE WAS OBVIOUSLY A VERY ARTICULATE, CULTIVATED MAN, A THEATERGOER AND ALL THAT. HE HAD ALL OF THE NEW YORKER CROWD. -- NEW YORKER CROWD completely buffaloed >> [INDISCERNIBLE] [LAUGHTER]
ONE COULD DO A MOVIE ABOUT ALL OF THE PEOPLE AROUND THE CASE. YOU KNOW, IF WE BELIEVE, AS THE ESTABLISHMENT KEEPS TELLING US, THESE INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES, THAT RUSSIA REALLY HACKED THis ELECTION AND RUSSIA IS EVERYWHERE AND EVERYTHING, WE HAVE REALLY LOST IT. THIS IS REALLY WHAT IS GOING ON, AND IT IS SO DISTURBING TO ME TO KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT. RAY MCGOVERN IS HERE. RAY? [APPLAUSE] MR. STONE: AND A CRYPTOLOGIST LIKE JEFFREY CARR, WHO IS VERY TOP OF THE GAME. THEY HAVE WRITTEN SO MANY ARTICLES NOW. IT IS ALICE IN WONDERLAND, BECAUSE THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I HAVE SEEN SUCH A MAJOR INVESTIGATION GOING ON WHERE THERE IS NO EVIDENCE. USUALLY YOU HAVE SOME SHRED OF EVIDENCE. [LAUGHTER] MR. STONE: IT IS ALMOST AS IF WE'RE GOING TO INVESTIGATE AND FIND A SHRED OF EVIDENCE. SO THIS IS A BIZARRE LOGIC AND BACKED BY ALL OF OUR MEDIA, THE MUSCLE OF OUR COUNTRY, AND THE BELIEF IN THE MILITARY SYSTEM THAT DESPITE ALL OF THIS, WE NEED $58 BILLION MORE ON THE BUDGET TO KEEP GOING WITH OUR MILITARY STATE.
THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT KENNEDY WARNED US AGAINST, AND ONE OF THE GREAT STORIES OF JFK WAS THAT HE WAS NOT IN THE MILITARY. NONE OF THESE NEW GUYS HAVE BEEN, AND AS A RESULT, THE CLINTONS, OBAMA'S BUSHES, Fold VERY QUICKLY TO WHAT THE MILITARY TELLS THEM. IT IS DISGUSTING THAT DONALD TRUMP WOULD SAY, WE WOULD GIVE YOU THE BEST GENERALS WITH THE MOST MEDALS, AND IT IS ALMOST LIKE THEY ARE A TOY SET FOR HIM. THESE SHINY NEW GENERALS WILL RUN THE WARS AS OPPOSED TO THE OBAMA TYPE PEOPLE WHO TRY TO CONTROL THEM. I WILL GIVE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THE BANG FOR THE BUCK. Next time WE HAVE A WAR, HE SAID, WE WILL WIN IT. HE SAID THAT. YOU KNOW THE APPLICATIONS OF THAT IN A NUCLEAR SITUATION -- IMPLICATIONS OF THAT IN A NUCLEAR SITUATION. AND and the end of the Earth .
MANY PEOPLE HERE BELIEVE IN NUCLEAR WINTER. I DO, AND MY CO-AUTHOR FROM UNTOLD HISTORY, WHO IS NOT HERE, WOULD TELL YOU ABOUT NUCLEAR WINTER AT LENGTH. IT IS REALLY SCARY, BECAUSE WE DO NOT KNOW WHAT TRUMP IS GOING TO DO FROM DAY TO DAY. NOBODY KNOWS WHAT HE IS GOING TO DO. HE DOES NOT KNOW. IT DEPENDS ON HIS DREAM. HIS DREAM THE NIGHT BEFORE. I THINK IT IS GREAT THEATER, MY GOD, WE ARE SEEING THE BEST REALITY TELEVISION WE CAN AND HE IS LIVING UP TO IT. BUT THE PROBLEM IS WHEN HE SENSES THEIR RATINGS WILL FALL OFF AND THE INTEREST LEVEL FALLS off, HOW TO KEEP THE SHOW GOING? WHO CAN HE FIRE, HOW DOES HE KEEP THE INTEREST? HE IS AWARE OF THE INTEREST, AS OPPOSED TO THE BORING EISENHOWER PRESIDENCY, WHERE THE GUY PLAYED GOLF TODAY, SHOT A WHATEVER IT WAS, AND THEY LIKED IKE BECAUSE HE DOES NOT DO ANYTHING. HE WAS A DO-NOTHING PRESIDENT -- NOT REALLY, BUT THAT IS WHAT THEY THOUGHT AT THE TIME. EVERYTHING WAS BACKWARDS.
EVEN WHEN JFK CAME IN ON THE BASIS THAT HE WOULD MAKE THIS COUNTRY STRONGER BECAUSE WE WERE FAILING IN CUBA, AND OF COURSE WE KNOW THAT IS ALL BACKWARD AND HE KNEW BETTER, BUT HE SAID IT FOR ELECTION REASONS, AND NIXON WAS PICTURED AS A SOFTY, A DO-NOTHING, EISENHOWER TYPE CANDIDATE. THESE ARE HUGE MISTAKES, BUT NOW THEY HAVE THROWN IN THE PRESIDENT AND SAID HE IS A DUPE OF THE RUSSIANS, A MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE. THIS IS SOMETHING BURT LANCASTER WOULD THINK UP IN THE ONE WHERE FREDRIC MARCH -- >> SEVEN DAYS in May. MR. STONE: THANK YOU. HE INCLUDES -- ACCUSES FREDRIC MARCH, a straight shooter type of man, OF BEING A DUPE, PRACTICALLY A SPY FOR THE RUSSIANS BECAUSE HE WANTS A NUCLEAR TREATY IN THE 1960'S. THAT WAS THE BASIS OF THE KENNEDY KHRUSHCHEV DEAL.
WHAT IS WRONG WITH PEACE? I CANNOT FIGURE IT OUT, BUT HERE WE HAVE EVERYBODY IN THE ESTABLISHMENT, THE RESPECT OF ALL ESTABLISHMENTS TELLING US THAT ANY KIND OF DEAL WITH RUSSIANS IS BAD. THIS IS UNBELIEVABLE. I HAVE NEVER HEARD IT THROUGH THE 1960'S, 1950'S. IT WAS SOME KIND OF PEACE PARTY OF SOME KIND. IT SCARED ME IN THE ELECTION OF 2016 -- WHERE IS THE PEACE PARTY? WHO ARE THE PEACE PEOPLE? THERE WAS NO ONE REPRESENTS OFFICIALLY THAT POSITION. SANDERS WAS VERY WEAK ON FOREIGN POLICY, VERY WEAK. HE SAID A FEW COMMONSENSE THINGS, BUT SINCE THEN HE HAS JOINED THE HEARD, THE ESTABLISHMENT THAT IS RIGHT DOWN THE ROAD HERE.
THIS IS A CRISIS TIME IF PEOPLE THINK LIKE THIS, AND WE'RE ALL MAKING OUR -- I AM NOT WORRIED, BUT CERTAINLY IT IS SAD TO HAVE LIVED THROUGH THIS WHOLE CYCLE FROM THE 1940'S UNTIL NOW, AND SEE THE SAME REPETITIONS. ANYONE WHO WAS IN VIETNAM OR IN KOREA RECOGNIZES THE SAME KIND OF TALK, THE SAME KIND OF SPLIT. AMERICA FIRST, AMERICA PATRIOTIC , ALL THAT STUFF. WE HEARD IT, AND WE HEARD IT AGAIN ON IRAQ, ONE AND TWO. AND BY THE WAY, IRAQ ONE WAS A HUGE MISTAKE. BILLY PAYS THE -- IRAQ ONE AND TWO. AND BY THE WAY, IRAQ ONE WAS A HUGE MISTAKE, and Iraq two was a major debacle. AND THE DESTRUCTION OF LIBYA WAS A GIGANTIC MISTAKE. THE REFUGEE SITUATION IN EUROPE, THIS IS SERIOUS, SERIOUS DESTABILIZATION. WE HAVE COMPLETELY DESTABILIZEd THE WEST, AND HOLD UP OUR HANDS AND SAY RUSSIA DID IT. [LAUGHTER]
RUSSIA HAS DESTABILIZED EVERY ELECTION, IT IS BEHIND EVERYTHING. THIS IS SHAMEFUL AND A LACK OF -- WHAT IT IS, A LACK OF RESPONSIBILITY. IT IS LIKE A CHILD THAT BREAKS SOMETHING IN THE ROOM AND SAYS HE DID IT. YOU CANNOT DO THAT, BUT THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE DOING. IT IS A MUST AS IF THERE IS NO GAME PLAN. THE GAME PLAN, AS MANY OF YOU HAVE SUGGESTED, I HAVE READ IN YOUR ARTICLES, VERY SMART AND VERY PERCEPTIVE HAVE SUGGESTED THAT THE UNITED STATES GOAL IS MUCH MORE INTELLIGENTLY TO FIND ONE AS BEING ONE TO OWN EURASIA, OWN THE PROPRIETARY RIGHTS TO THAT PART OF THE WORLD BECAUSE IT IS THE RICHEST PART OF THE WORLD.
THAT MAKES SOME SENSE, AND WE PUT IT OUT THE OPEN. CHENEY DID AS MUCH AS ANYBODY. IF THAT IS OUR GOAL, WE ARE IN FOR A -- GOOD LUCK. GOOD LUCK, BECAUSE WE ARE IN FOR A LOT OF TURBULENCE AND CHAOS. AND WE BUILD UP THE MILITARY, WE SPEND 10 TIMES MORE THAN THE RUSSIANS. TWICE, THREE TIMES AS MUCH AS THE CHINESE, AND 10 TIMES MORE THAN THE RUSSIANS AND WE ARE SCARED OF THEN? HAVE YOU EVER THOUGHT OF THE WORK -- REVERSE POSSIBILITY IF YOU ARE A RUSSIAN AND YOU WERE SURROUNDED BY THE AMOUNT OF MISSILES AND ABMS AND PoLARIS'S AND SUBMARINES FROM ALASKA ALL THE WAY TO LITHUANIA, LATVIA, THE BORDERS AND CERTAINLY IN CZECHOSLOVAKIA AND ROMANIA -- EXCUSE ME, ROMANIA AND POLAND. THE POLLS HAVE DONE THE AGAIN -- POLES HAVE DONE IT AGAIN. THEY HAVE WAITED TO STRIKE FOR BREZINSKI, BUT NOW HE IS DEAD I HAVE SOMEHOW FEARS THAT POLAND WILL ONCE AGAIN BE THE INITIATOR OF A THIRD WORLD CONFLICT. SO WE HAVE A LOT TO THINK ABOUT. I'M GOING TO GO SIT DOWN NOW WITH JIM, I WISH YOU WOULD ASK HIM SOME QUESTIONS AS WELL AS ME. [APPLAUSE] >>
JH (Moderator): SIT DOWN AND I WILL BOTTOM IT -- MODERATE. MR. STONE: OK, GOOD. ACTUALLY, -- >> ACTUALLY, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO SEE A CONVERSATION BETWEEN THESE TWO GUYS, ONE WINO -- WHO I KNOW HAVE BEEN FRIENDS FOR A LONG TIME. OLIVER, I'M CURIOUS -- I WILL START OUT WITH A QUESTION TO YOU -- I THINK IT IS SAFE TO SAY THAT YOU AND DONALD TRUMP DO NOT SHARE THE SAME ECONOMIC OR POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY, AND YET IT SEEMS LIKE YOU ARE ABLE TO DRAW A DISTINCTION BETWEEN A MAN WHOSE POLICIES AND POLITICS THAT YOU HAVE NO RESPECT FOR, BUT YET DRAW THIS DISTINCTION BETWEEN HIS WHOLE ANTI-RUSSIA CRUSADE -- THIS WHOLE ANTI-RUSSIA CRUSADE THAT THE NATIONAL SECURITY STATE SEEMS TO WAGING AGAINST TRUMP. CAN YOU COMMENT ON THAT?
OS: I Thought I did, YOU HAVE TO REALIZE THAT EVERY BEEN -- EVERYTHING I THINK -- MICROPHONE? >> YOU CAN TAKE IT OUT OF THERE. RESPECT FOR, BUT YET DRAW THIS DISTINCTION BETWEEN HIS WHOLE ANTI-RUSSIA CRUSADE -- THIS WHOLE ANTI-RUSSIA CRUSADE THAT THE NATIONAL SECURITY STATE SEEMS TO WAGING AGAINST TRUMP. CAN YOU COMMENT ON THAT? MR. STONE: YOU HAVE TO REALIZE THAT EVERY BEEN -- EVERYTHING I THINK -- MICROPHONE? >> YOU CAN TAKE IT OUT OF THERE. MR. STONE: YOU HAVE TO REALIZE, AND PLEASE, I HAVE A DISCLAIMER TO MAKE. EVERYTHING I THINK, FEEL, AND DO, IS AS A PRAGMATIST. THIS IS MY FIRST ROLE -- DRAMATIST. THIS IS MY FIRST ROLE. I LOOK FOR THE STORY AND THE NARRATIVE, AND THE FIRST THING THAT ATTRACTED ME TO JFK WAS THE POSSIBILITY OF A GREAT NARRATIVE HERE, AND I TRIED TO PUT THAT INTO THE FILM. THE HUNT TO THE CLUES OF WHO HAD KILLED HIM AND WHY? THE STORY. I THINK STORY. I'M NOT A POLITICAL ANALYST WHO SITS AND DOES HIS WORK, READ THE BORING PAPERS. NO. WHAT I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT MR. PUTIN, HE READS EVERYTHING. HE IS VERY DRY, READS A LOT, DOES A LOT OF RESEARCH. GOOD PEOPLE DO THAT. OF COURSE IN EARLY -- UNFORTUNATELY, TRUMP DOES NOT READ. SEVERAL PEOPLE HAVE CONFIRMED THAT NOW. IT IS UNBELIEVABLE. HE HAS GOT ATTENTION DEFICIT DISORDER. THAT FASCINATES ME IS A DRAMATIST. HE IS SUCH A BEAUTIFUL DRAMATIZATION OF A CHILD PLAYING WITH TOYS, AND THE WHOLE POINT OF HIS LIFE IS, IN A SENSE, BEING CREDITED, BEING APPLAUDED, STANDUP, BE PROUD, ALL OF THE PARENTS, EVERYONE KNOWING WHO HE IS. IF YOU WALKS INTO A ROOM AND NOBODY KNOWS WHO HE IS, HE WOULD SALT AND RETREAT QUICKLY -- SULK AND RETREAT QUICKLY. WHEN YOU SEE HIS WIFE NOT TOUCHING HIS HAND, YOU FEEL SAD FOR THE GUY. PEOPLE TOLD ME STORIES BUT HIS NEW YEAR'S PARTY IN MAR-A-LAGO -- I WAS THERE. IT IS LIKE GOING TO A NATIONAL PARK, YOU CAN GET IN AS LONG AS YOU PAY, AND YOU CAN SEE THE PRESIDENT, AND HE MIXES WITH THE CROWD AND ALL OF THAT, BUT IT IS LIKE A MUSEUM. IT IS LIKE A STRANGE PLACE. IT IS LIKE HE SHOULD BE DEAD, A MUMMY'S TOMB BUT HE IS STILL THERE. IT WILL BE A TOMB ONE DAY.
I GOT OFF THE POINT, BUT WHAT WAS I SAYING? >> PUT AN END RUSSIA. -- PUTIN AND RUSSIA. MR. STONE: OH, NEW YEAR'S EVE. JUST THE IMAGE OF HIM SITTING THERE, AS THE CLOCK STRUCK MIDNIGHT, HE WAS SAD. HE WAS THE ONLY ONE OF THE TABLE. EVERYONE WAS KISSING, DANCING. HE WAS ALONE. NOBODY WAS SITTING AT THE TABLE WITH HIM. WANTS TO BE ALONE. I THINK YOU BURY YOURSELF IN TALKING TO PEOPLE. IF YOU KNOW REAL ESTATE PEOPLE, I AM A NEW YORKER, THEY ARE THE DEALMAKERS. THEY ARE IMMEDIATELY LOOKING AROUND, WHO CAN THEY TALK TO, WHO CAN MAKE IT AHEAD WITH, HOW TO MAKE A BUCK. I FIND MOST OF THEM HAVE NO MORALITY. [LAUGHTER] OLIVER: PROBABLY WHAT IS BEHIND SOME OF THE BULL -- EXCUSE ME, IT WOULD NOT SURPRISE ME IF AT THE END OF THE DAY, LIKE TWO YEARS OF INVESTIGATION AND HOW MANY MILLIONS OF PAGES OF BULL SHIT WITH A REALIZE -- AND THEY WOULD REALIZE WHAT THIS RUSSIAN LAWYER. YOU CAN ALWAYS TALK ABOUT INFLUENCE, INFLUENCE AND ELECTIONS. EVERYBODY INFLUENCES AN ELECTION,
BUT WE ALL KNOW THAT AiPAC, THE ISRAELI LOBBY, IT HAS A LOT MORE INFLUENCE THAN ANY RUSSIAN COULD POSSIBLY HAVE IF THEY HAD ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD. [APPLAUSE] OLIVER: AND INFLUENCE IS A BIG WORD. SO IS HACK. BACK TO YOUR QUESTION. >>
JH (Moderator): TELL ME ABOUT PUTIN, HOW YOU CAME TO --
OS: OLIVER: PUTIN, DO NOT SAY POO-TI N. >>
JH (Moderator): OK. TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW YOU GOT TO THE INTERVIEW STAGE.
OS: : I CANNOT. IT IS A STATE SECRET. I HAVE TO KEEP IT UNDER WRAPS. I WOULD SAY, PLEASE WATCH IT. IT SETS A MOOD. IT IS AN ON DISHES THING FOR ME TO DO, A FOUR-HOUR DOCUMENTARY, I KNOW THAT. BUT I HAD 25 - 30 HOURS OF MATERIAL, GIVING 80 REASON AND LETTING IT FLOW, IT WAS LIKE UNWRAPPING AN ONION OR A RUSSIAN DOLL -- ALWAYS ANOTHER THING INSIDE. IN THE FIRST HOUR HE ANSWERS A QUESTION, THEN WE COME BACK TO IT THREE HOURS LATER AND YOU BEGIN TO FEEL HIM AND UNDERSTAND HOW HE THINKS. I THINK THAT IS THE ROLE OF THE, NOT REALLY A DOCUMENTARY AS MUCH AS A ONE-ON-ONE, A CONVERSATION OVER FOUR HOURS LONG. IN DIFFERENT PLACES. IT IS SUBTITLED, BUT HE IS UNDERSTANDABLE IN HIS BODY LANGUAGE. I WILL MAKE A POINT THAT IT IS FAR BETTER TO KEEP HIM IN HIS NATIVE LANGUAGE, BECAUSE ONCE HE IS DUBBED, IN THE UNITED STATES, YOU GET THE VOICE OF THE ActoR. IF YOU PICK SOMEBODY THAT SOUND LIKE A FOOTBALL COACH, YOU -- LIKE WHEN CHARLIE ROSE SPEAKS, IT IS NOT THE WAY HE SPEAKS. YOU GET HIS VOICE AND THE INTERPRETER (who was a brilliant young man), HE WAS ABLE TO INTERPRET PRETTY ACCURATELY. TRAINED BY THE KREMLIN. >> JIM -- [INDISCERNIBLE]
OS: OLIVER: THAT IS NOT WHAT IT IS ABOUT. IT IS ABOUT LISTENING TO HIM. >> OK. LET'S DO SOMETHING UNORTHODOX AND TAKE QUESTIONS. >> YOU ARE FINE. >>
JH (Moderator): JIM, I WAS GOING TO ASK YOU A QUESTION. OLIVER MENTIONED "7 DAYS IN MAY. " TELL US THE STORY OF THAT, WHAT KENNEDY, THE WORLD -- ROLE HE PLAYED AND WHAT HAPPENED.
JE: IT WAS FUNNY, I TALKED ABOUT HENRY KISSINGER. KENNEDY REALLY LIKED MOVIE'S. HE SAW IT A LOT OF THEM. HE REALLY LIKED THE BOOK, HE LIKED IT SO MUCH THAT HE KNEW THE DIRECTOR, John Frankenheimer, AND HE SAID, WHY DO YOU GUYS SHOOT IT HERE. I WILL GET EVERYBODY OUT OF here FOR A WEEKEND. AND HE CAN COME IN AND shoot THE INTERIORS AT THE WHITE HOUSE. THAT IS HOW MUCH HE WANTED TO SEE THE MOVIE GET DONE. HE REALLY LIKED THE MESSAGE OF THE PICTURE, THAT THE MILITARY REALLY THOUGHT THEY COULD TAKE control of THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES.
BECAUSE HE HAD BEEN THROUGH SO MUCH. THAT IS WHY KENNEDY, BY THE WAY, THAT IS WHY HE TAPED THE WHITE HOUSE. HE TAPED THE WHITE HOUSE BECAUSE HE FELT EVERYBODY HAD BAILED ON HIM AFTER THE BAY OF PIGS, THAT THEY WERE ALL BLAMING HIM FOR WHAT HAD HAPPENED AND IT REALLY WAS NOT HIS FAULT. HE SAID, YOU GUYS -- HE DID NOT TELL THEM THIS, BUT HE SAID YOU ARE NOT GOING TO DO THIS ANYMORE BECAUSE I'M TAPING EVERY CONVERSATION AND I WILL KNOW WHAT REALLY HAPPENED. WHEN I AM OUT OF HERE, WE WILL HEAR ABOUT IT. THAT IS WHY HE PUT IN THE TAPING SYSTEM. >>
JH (Moderator): I DID NOT KNOW THAT. JIM:
OS: YEAH. >> IS THAT TRUE? Do I have to fact-check that? [INDISCERNIBLE] [LAUGHTER]
JD: BY THE WAY, HE CANNOT TALK ABOUT THIS SPECIAL, BUT YOU CAN TALK ABOUT another movie "UKRAINE ON FIRE," BECAUSE HE WAS ONE OF THE EXECUTIVE PRODUCERS. UNFORTUNATELY THE MOVIE HEAVEN -- HAS NOT GONE A NATIONAL RELEASE, BUT IT IS A GOOD ANALYSIS OF HOW THE UNITED STATES PRESS HAS COMPLETELY DISTORTED WHAT WENT ON IN THE UKRAINE AND CRIMEA. ALRIGHT. AND IF YOU GET A CHANCE, --
OS: [INDISCERNIBLE] >> I THINK IT WILL COME OUT SOON , on several platforms
JH (Moderator): JIM: GOOD. "UKRAINE ON FIRE." >> WHAT ABOUT SNOWDEN? WE HAVE THE DEBATE ON WHETHER HE IS A PATRIOT OR A TRAITOR. AND LOOKING AT THE ESTABLISHMENT -- WHAT IS YOUR REACTION? YOU MET HIM PERSONALLY. TELL US ABOUT HIM AS A PERSON. >>
OS: SNOWDEN WAS VERY -- THE MOVIE IS A RESULT OF HIS INFORMATION, HIS INTERPRETATION. HE SPOKE WITH US NINE DIFFERENT TIMES. WE WENT TO MOSCOW, I DID MOST OF ALL. BUT HE, YOU KNOW, IT IS HIS RIGHT TO GET THE STORY RIGHT FROM HIS POINT OF VIEW. I SAID FROM THE BEGINNING THIS IS HIS POINT OF VIEW, NOT THE NSA POINT OF VIEW. YOU HAVE TO RECOGNIZE THAT. THEY SEE THE STORY DIFFERENTLY. THEY SAY IT IS made UP. ALL WE CAN DO IS, WE DO NOT KNOW WHAT REALLY HAPPENED, BUT AFTER SPENDING TIME WITH THEM I DO NOT BELIEVE HE IS AN ACTOR. HE TOLD THE STORY TO THE BEST OF HIS KNOWLEDGE. THIS IS THE MOVIE OF THAT.
THROUGH HIM I GOT TO KNOW MR. P. , BECAUSE I RAN INTO HIM AT A SOCIAL EVENT -- I RAN INTO HIM AT A SOCIAL EVENT. HE WAS A PATRON OF A THEATER GROUP. HE WAS IN A FOLK TALES KIND OF THING, VERY INTERESTING. I DO NOT SPEAK RUSSIAN. I SAT THROUGH ABOUT TWO AND A HALF HOURS AND FELL ASLEEP WAITING FOR HIM IN THE BACK. I MET WITH HIM IN THE BACK ROOM OF THE THEATER WHERE HE WAS, I ASKED HIM VERY NICELY ABOUT -- HE KNEW I WAS DOING "SNOWDEN," NOT IN MOSCOW BUT IN GERMANY. I ASKED HIM QUESTIONS. HIS ANSWERS WERE SURPRISING. I WILL NOT TELL YOU WHAT THEY ARE. YOU WILL SEE HIS DISCUSSION WITH ME ABOUT SNOWDEN IN THE SECOND HOUR. AND HE CERTAINLY TALKS ABOUT THE U.S. , RUSSIA -- UH, DIPLOMACY, NOT DIPLOMACY BUT POLICIES ON EXTRADITION WHICH IS IMPORTANT TO THE CASE BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN SO MANY RUSSIAN CRIMINALS THAT HAVE TAKEN OFF FROM RUSSIA WITH MONEY, STATE MONEY OR EMBEZZLED MONEY, AND LANDED IN OTHER COUNTRIES, SO IT IS A BIG ISSUE FOR THEM. >>
JH (Moderator): PARDON ME FOR REVEALING WHAT COULD BE A STATE SECRET, BUT I DID HEAR THAT, MAYBE LEAKING SOMETHING UNAUTHORIZED, THE TRAILER TO THIS "PUTIN" INTERVIEW SERIES IS that OLIVER ASKED PUTIN, YOU ARE ATEX-KGB, YET HERE IS A GUY THAT HAS REVEALED SECRETS OF THE U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY STATE SO HOW CAN YOU CONSIDER HIM A PATRIOT? AND I THINK THAT HE ANSWERS IT, WHICH MAY BE A REASON TO WATCH THE SERIES. OK, WE ARE GOING TO CHANGE THE FORMAT. IF I CALL ON YOU ALL I ASK IS IF YOU NOT -- IS THAT YOU DO NOT MAKE A SPEECH. ASK A QUESTION. SIR? >>
Questioner: MY QUESTION CONCERNS I GUESS WHAT WE WOULD REGARD AS A TABOO SUBJECT. CAN YOU COMMENT AT ALL ON THE CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN JFK AND Ben Gurion, THE FIRST PRIME MINISTER OF ISRAEL, REGARDING THE FRENCH BUILT A POWER PLANT AND JFK'S DESIRE TO HAVE INTERNATIONAL INSPECTORS CHECK OUT THE NUCLEAR ENERGY SITUATION THERE. MORE GENERALLY SPEAKING, DO YOU BELIEVE OUR RELATIONSHIP OVER THE LAST 60-70 YEARS WITH ISRAEL AND THE ZIONIST MOVEMENT HAS BEEN DETRIMENTAL TO AMERICA'S NATURAL SECURITY -- NATIONAL SECURITY? I DO NOT SEE ANY REASON WHY IT WOULD NOT BE WORTHWHILE TO DISCUSS. [LAUGHTER] >>
OS: JIM, GRABBED THE MICROPHONE. -- GRAB THE MICROPHONE. >> HOT POTATO. >> LOOK -- >> OK. >> Let’s start out with a compilation of facts first.
JD: IF YOU TALK TO THESE GUYS IN THE CIA AND THE STATE DEPARTMENT, AND IF YOU DID WHAT I DID AND DO A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS, THEY WILL TELL YOU THAT KENNEDY WAS THE LAST PRESIDENT WHO REALLY WANTED TO STOP ISRAEL FROM GETTING THE BOMB. HE DID NOT THINK THERE SHOULD BE ANY ATOMIC WEAPONS IN THE MIDDLE EAST AT ALL AND HE WAS ABSOLUTELY FURIOUS WHEN HE FOUND OUT THAT THEY WERE LYING TO HIM. HE SAID, I WILL DO EVERYTHING I CAN TO OBSTRUCT THE WEAPONS PROGRAM FROM HERE ON IN. KENNEDY HAD A REALLY CLOSE FRIENDSHIP WITH GAMEL Abdul Nasser, WHO HE HAD ADMIRED VERY MUCH BECAUSE HE THOUGHT BEING A SECULARIST AND A SOCIALIST, THAT HE COULD CHANNEL THE MIDDLE EAST INTO A MORE MODERN WORLD, A MORE MODERN FRAMEWORK. SO HE HAD, WELL, HOW CLOSE THEY WERE WHEN NASSER GOT THE NEWS KENNEDY WAS KILLED HE WENT INTO A MONTH-LONG DEPRESSION AND DEMAND THAT HIS FUNERAL BE SHOWN FOUR TIMES ON NATIONAL TELEVISION. BECAUSE HE KNEW IT WOULD BE THE END OF AN ERA. HE BREAKS RELATIONS WITH THE USA IN 1966. OK.
BUT KENNEDY WANTED TO BUILD THE FRAMEWORK, WHAT HE PERCEIVED AS THE MODERATES IN THE MIDDLE EAST, BECAUSE IN A SECOND ADMINISTRATION HE WAS GOING TO MOVE FOR A SOLUTION ON THE PALESTINIAN PROBLEM. OK? WHEN IS THE LAST TIME ANYBODY SAID ANYTHING LIKE THAT? BY THE WAY, I CANNOT TAKE CREDIT FOR THIS. [INDISCERNIBLE] >> ROBERT Rakob (Rakove?) -- HAS AN INTERESTING BOOK. entitled: Kennedy Johnson and the Non-Aligned World. IT IS AN EXCELLENT ANALYSIS OF THAT WHOLE SUBJECT. SO THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS. >>
JH (Moderator): JIM, YOU REMINDED ME OF A BIG CONTRIBUTION YOU MADE. YOU OPENED MY EYES TO IT. I SAID KENNEDY WAS A STANDARD COLD WARRIOR MOSTLY, BUT YOU POINTED OUT THAT IN TERMS OF THESE NATIONALIST MOVEMENTS, THE ANTI-COLONIALIST MOVEMENTS, THEY WERE PERCEIVED TO BE PROCOMMUNIST BECAUSE THEY WERE GETTING INDEPENDENCE FROM WESTERN POWERS. YOU SAID KENNEDY WAS SYMPATHETIC TO THOSE MOVEMENTS. >>
JD: THE MOST IMPORTANT -- IF YOU WANT TO UNDERSTAND KENNEDY, LET ME GIVE BACKGROUND. I WAS IN THAT SCHOOL ALSO. ONE DAY I AM IN A BOOKSTORE IN A TOWN CALLED A JULIAN, AND I AM ON VACATION. I GO IN THE BOOKSTORE AND I SEE THE COVER OF A BOOK CALLED "JFK: Ordeal in AFRICA. " ON THE COVER IS THE FAMOUS PICTURE OF KENNEDY HEARING OF THE DEATH OF Patrice Lumumba--. If you haven’t seen that picture, HE HAS HIS HAND OVER HIS FACE AND HE IS WEEPING WHEN HE IS GETTING THE NEWS. I AM THINKING, WHAT IS THIS GUY DOING CRYING OVER THE DEATH OF A BLACK REVOLUTIONARY IN AFRICA? JOHNSON WOULDN'T DO THAT, Eisenhower wouldn’t do that, Eisenhower tried to kill Lumumba. ALRIGHT. AND SO I SAID, HOW THE HECK DID THAT HAPPEN?
TO UNDERSTAND THAT REACTION YOU HAVE TO GO BACK TO A GUY NAMED EDmunD Gulian, WHO IS THE STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL INSIDE SAIGON IN 1951. AND KENNEDY HAD A BRIEF RELATIONSHIP WITH HIM IN THE UNITED STATES. SO WHEN HE WENT TO SAIGON HE SOUGHT HIM OUT AND THEY HAD A MEETING AT THE TOP OF AN OUTDOOR RESTAURANT. HE ASKED, ARE WE ON THE RIGHT SIDE IN THIS thing ARE WE GOING TO WIN? AND Gulian SAYS, THERE IS NO WAY FRANCE'S GOING TO WIN THE WAR. HO CHI MINH HAS FIRED UP YOUNG VIET MEN TO THE POINT WHERE THEY WOULD RATHER DIE THAN GO UNDER the yoke of COLONIALISM. FRANCE WILL NEVER WIN THE WAR OF ATTRITION, BECAUSE THE HOMEFRONT WILL NEVER SUPPORT IT.
YOU TAKE THAT AND YOU PUT IT INTO A 1965 SCENARIO, SOMEBODY SHOULD OF TOLD THAT TO JOHNSON. YOU WILL LOSE THIS COUNTRY, IN A WAR YOU CAN NEVER WIN. THAT IS WHY I USED THAT QUOTE. KENNEDY WOULD HAVE NEVER SAID THAT UNLESS HE HAD MET GULIAN. AND HE WAS OPEN-MINDED ENOUGH TO TAKE THAT -- IT WAS A TRANSFORMING EXPERIENCE FOR HIM. I TRIED TO FIGURE THAT OUT. WHY WOULD HE BE SO IMPACTED BY THIS GUY? AND SOME OF THE CONVERSATION THAT KENNEDY HAD WITH THE Nehru, the LEADER OF INDIA, AND HE IS LECTURING KENNEDY ON THE EVILS OF COLONIALISM. KENNEDY PUTS UP HIS HAND AND SAYS, STOP, NOBODY HAs TO TELL ME ABOUT COLONIALISM. I COME FROM A PEOPLE THAT ARE COLONIZED -- WORK ON ICE FOR 800 YEARS. HE WAS TALKING ABOUT THE BRITISH AND IRELAND. THAT IS WHY IT HIT HOME WITH HIM THE WAY IT DID. >>
JH (Moderator): YES sir? [INDISCERNIBLE] >> --
Questioner: Over what time period did your conversations TAKE PLACE WITH MR. PUTIN? >>
OS: As I REMEMBER FROM FEBRUARY, 15 TO -- FROM JUNE 15, 2015 UNTIL February 2017, RIGHT AFTER THE ELECTION. >>
JH (Moderator): OLIVER, I WANT TO ASK ABOUT JFK. YOU GOT A LOT OF ADVERSE REACTION from the Mainstream (that’s an understatement, an unsolicited comment from somebody ) AND YET, YET, YOU WERE RESPONSIBLE -- THAT MOVIE, THE BLURB AT THE END OF THE MOVIE TALKING ABOUT THE SECRECY AND RECORDS, IT WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS MONUMENTAL LAW “THe JFK Assassination RECORDS ACT” that HAS BEEN SO INSTRUMENTAL IN HELPING US TO UNDERSTAND THE NATURE OF THE NATIONAL SECURITY STATE, ESPECIALLY DURING THE COLD WAR, OPERATION NORWOODs. I AM CURIOUS TO YOUR REACTION ON THE HORRIBLE ATTACKS YOU RECEIVED, AT THE SAME TIME KNOWING YOU HAD ACHIEVED SOMETHING POSITIVE.
OS: THAT IS A TOUGH QUESTION, SOMETHING FOR MAYBE AN AUTOBIOGRAPHY. [LAUGHTER] OLIVER: IN TERMS OF MY CAREER, IT HURT MY CAREER IN MANY WAYS. ALTHOUGH MY NAME IS RECOGNIZABLE, IT DID HURT MY CAREER. BUT THE CONDEMNATION MADE ME FEEL BAD, FIRSTLY BECAUSE I HAVE ALWAYS BEEN QUIET IN MY NATURE. I NEVER SOUGHT OUT TO BE CONTROVERSIAL at all. I WAS SHY IN SCHOOL AND I HAVE REMAINED A CONFORMIST. My life was MIXED UP, A MIXED BAG. THE ATTACKS THEY HURT AND SCARRED ME. THE TRUTH OF THE LEGISLATION OF WHICH I AM SUPPOSED TO BE PROUD IS THAT IT WAS PASSED REALLY IN REACTION TO THE FILM IN ORDER FOR CONGRESS TO DENY I WAS ON THE RIGHT TRAIL. [LAUGHTER] THE IDEA WAS, WE WILL DUMP A LOT OF PAPERS AND it WILL BE SO CONFUSING, IT WILL TAKE 10 YEARS TO GO THROUGH AND PEOPLE WILL FORGET ABOUT IT. THAT IS WHAT THEY DO WITH 9-11 and what they do with PRETTY MUCH ANY INVESTIGATION, AND THEY HOPE THAT THE RUSSIAN INVESTIGATION WILL END UP THAT WAY. IN A MESS OF SOCIETY'S HYSTERIA.
AT THE TIME, IT WAS HURTFUL. I TRIED TO BE STRONG AND I KEPT GOING AND I DO NOT LOOK BACK. THE NEXT MOVIE, RIGHT AWAY I TURNED AROUND AND MADE A CLASSICAL MOVIE ABOUT A VIETNAMESE PEASANT WOMAN, IT WAS CALLED "HEAVEN AND EARTH. " IT HAD TOMMY LEE JONES, and a beautiful young actress named Hip Tee Lee,. IT IS BEAUTIFUL. I LOVE IT. IT IS ONE OF MY FAVORITES. AND IT GOES BETWEEN TWO CULTURES, between Vietnamese and American, BETWEEN COMMUNISTS AND CAPITALISTS. SHE LIVES DURING THE WAR, SHE IS SPYING, NOT SPYING, ALMOST KILLED. SHE IS TORTURED. THE WOMEN REFUGEES, SHE ENDS UP IN THE UNITED STATES WITH AN AMERICAN SPECIAL OPS GUY WHO HAS A DARK PAST. HE IS A HERO, BUT AS WE FIND OUT HE TURNS INTO A DARKER MAN. LIKE MANY AMERICAN WAR VETERANS AT THAT TIME, HAVING REAL PROBLEMS. STILL DO -- REAL PROBLEMS LIKE SUICIDE. IT GOES TO THAT PLACE. AMERICA IS CORRUPTED BY THE WAR, BY THE VIETNAM WAR. The callousness comes back to America.
AND I LOVE THAT COUNTRY. IT WAS VERY DARING, CRITICAL. AND OF COURSE IT FLOPPED AT THE BOX OFFICE. [LAUGHTER] >>
JD: TO HIS CREDIT, HE ANSWERED EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE ATTACKS ON HIS MOVIE. AND IF I'M CORRECT ABOUT THIS, THEY DID NOT WANT YOU TO ANSWER the Lardner thing. YOU HAD TO THREATENED TO TAKE OUT AN AD. THEY DO NOT WANT TO RUN ANYTHING BY YOU?
OS: IT WAS THE LAUTNER PIECE. I GOT ON THE PHONE, Frank MANKIEWICZ WAS MY ADVISOR AND HE HAD BEEN THE PRESS SECRETARY FOR BOBBY KENNEDY. HE KNEW WHAT HE WAS DOING. HE FELT THAT WE SHOULD RESPOND. AND WHEN I CALLED BEN BRADLEY AT THE WASHINGTON POST, HE TOOK MY CALL AND, YOU KNOW, HE ACTED LIKE HE HATED ME WITHOUT EVEN KNOWING ME, BECAUSE HE WAS A GOOD FRIEND OF JACK KENNEDY AND DID NOT BELIEVE IN ANYTHING OF THIS NATURE. SO Lardner was his NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT WAS A VULTURE. HE HAD A HISTORY OF DEFENDING INTERVENTIONS ALL OVER THE WORLD, VERY GOOD AT IT. YOU KNOW HIS PAST BETTER THAN ME, NICARAGUA, GUATEMALA.
THE POINT IS THE WASHINGTON POST WAS -- THEY STILL ARE, WHO ARE WE KIDDING? WHERE IS THE WASHINGTON POST? [INDISCERNIBLE]
JD: Jeff Bezos owns it [LAUGHTER]
OS: IT DOES NOT MATTER WHO OWNS IT. IT IS RUNNING ON ITS OWN PETROL OF LIES. [INDISCERNIBLE]
JD: What was their incentive to run your article then?
OS: THEY HAD TO!! We fought with them. WE ARE GOING TO RUN THIS WHOLE THING. WE ARE GOING TO EMBARRASS YOU FOR NOT PUBLISHING IT. IT IS THE ONLY WAY IT WORKS WITH THOSE GUYS. THEY ARE TOUGH AND THEY ARE NASTY AND THEY ARE LIVING IN A TOUGH WORLD. YOU KNOW, MISERABLE. IT IS A TOUGH JOB. >>
JD: WHEN YOU READ THAT REPLY --
OS: GETTING THE SCOOP, IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT IS THE TRUTH, IT MATTERS GETTING THE SCOOP. And what that does to circulation. IT BECOMES A CYNICAL BUSINESS, AS BAD AS ADVERTISING. The hucksters they called them back in those days, in the 50s RIGHT Ray? WOULD YOU SAY ANYTHING ELSE, RAY? YOU WANT TO ADD ON THAT? YOUR MEMBER THE WASHINGTON POST IN THOSE DAYS --
Audience: Cat Calls
No comments:
Post a Comment