This week we wrap up the heart of our conference “The National Security State and the Kennedy Assassination” with the final presentation surrounding the fraudulent autopsy conducted by the U.S. national security establishment on the body of President Kennedy. Next week and the week after, we address the Cold War/national-security context of the assassination with talks by Doug Horne and me.
Last week’s speaker, David Mantik, a radiation oncologist who is one of the few people who have been permitted to view the JFK autopsy materials at the National Archives, gave a detailed talk on the fraudulent nature of the autopsy x-rays.
This week, our presenter will be Dr. Gary Aguilar, a practicing physician who has been studying the assassination for at least 20 years. He will talk about the various medical investigations conducted by the U.S. government and show the faults and fallacies in those investigations.
One of the most amusing aspects of the official version of events, which was covered by Mantik and which undoubtedly will be covered by Aguilar, involved a supposed bullet entrance wound in the back of Kennedy’s head. The autopsy pathologists had concluded that this entrance wound was supposedly located at the base of Kennedy’s skull, near his hairline in the back of his head.
When the House Select Committee on Assassinations reopened the investigation into the Kennedy assassination in the 1990s, a government medical panel concluded that the entrance wound had to be actually 4 inches higher on the back of Kennedy’s head. That was because the lower entrance wound didn’t comport with how things were supposed to have happened. So, they just moved the supposed entrance wound 4 inches higher to make the official scenario work.
One big problem: The physicians are that panel weren’t at the autopsy. They didn’t see the body. The pathologists at the autopsy saw the body. They identified the supposed entrance wound where they said they saw it. They didn’t see the supposed entrance wound 4 inches higher. So, that panel had the difficult task of pressuring the autopsy pathologists who were there and who examined the body to change their conclusion as to the location of that supposed bullet entry wound — by moving it upward by four inches!
“Oh what a tangled web we weave/When first we practice to deceive.”—Sir Walter Scott.
There are two common questions I have received over the years is: What relevance does the Kennedy assassination have for us today? Why do we focus attention on the assassination here at FFF? The answer to both questions is very simple: There is a straight line from the Kennedy assassination to where we are today.
One good example involves the U.S. national security establishment’s current ratcheting up of hostility and tensions with Russia and China, fully supported by the mainstream press. Notice that the hostile relationships are always portrayed as Russia’s and China’s fault. The Pentagon and the CIA are portrayed as innocent babes in the wood being forced to respond to the aggressiveness of these two official enemies or “adversaries” or “rivals” or “opponents.”
That is precisely what was going on during the entire Cold War. That was also what President Kennedy was determined to bring to an end after he achieved his “breakthrough” after the Cuban Missile Crisis. In his famous Peace Speech at American University in June 1963, Kennedy made it clear that he was bringing an end to the entire Cold War racket and intended to establish a peaceful and friendly relationship with both Russia. In other words, he was going to bring a stop to what the Pentagon and the CIA were doing then (and continue to do today).
With his assassination, Kennedy’s vision for America came to a screeching halt. Ever since then, the U.S. national-security establishment has done everything it could to maintain hostile relations with Russia. That, of course, has been used to justify ever-increasing tax-funded largess to the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA ever since Kennedy was killed.
Needless to say, no president since John Kennedy has dared to challenge this official-enemies paradigm. They have all deferred to the supreme majesty of the national-security establishment and done their best to ensure that Russia remains an official enemy of the United States.
All of this could have come to an end if Kennedy had not been taken out by his enemies, on grounds that his vision posed a grave threat to “national security.” If Kennedy’s vision had prevailed, America could also have been restored to its founding governmental system of a limited-government republic rather than a national-security state that is dependent on forever wars, forever hostilities, and forever enemies to justify its existence.
On May 5, our speaker will be Doug Horne. I will be the concluding speaker on May 12. We will both address the Cold War/national-security context of the Kennedy assassination.