The
J.F.K. Flap
by
Murray
N. Rothbard
by Murray N. Rothbard
DIGG THIS
This essay originally appeared in the May 1992 issue of The
Rothbard-Rockwell Report.
The most fascinating
thing about JFK,
as exciting and well-done as it is, is not the movie itself but
the hysterical attempt to marginalize, if not to suppress it. How
many movies can you remember where the entire Establishment,
in serried ranks, from left (The Nation) through Center to
Right, joined together as one in a frantic orgy of calumny and denunciation.
Time and Newsweek actually doing so before
the movie came out? Apparently, so fearful was the Establishment
that the Oliver Stone movie might prove convincing that the public
had to be thoroughly inoculated in advance. It was a remarkable
performance by the media, and it demonstrates, as nothing else,
the enormous and growing gap between Respectable Media opinion and
what the public Knows in its Heart.
You
would think from the shock of the Respectable Media, that Stone's
JFK was totally outlandish, off-the-wall, monstrous and fanciful
in its accusations against the American power structure. And you
would think that historical films never engaged in dramatic license,
as if such solemnly hailed garbage as Wilson and Sunrise
at Campobello had been models of scholarly precision. Hey,
come off it guys!
Despite the
fuss and feathers, to veteran Kennedy Assassination buffs, there
was nothing new in JFK. What Stone does is to summarize admirably
the best of a veritable industry of assassination revisionism
of literally scores of books, articles, tapes, annual conventions,
and archival research. Stone himself is quite knowledgeable in the
area, as shown by his devastating answer in the Washington Post,
to the smears of the last surviving Warren Commission member, Gerald
Ford, and the old Commission hack, David W. Belin. Despite the smears
in the press, there was nothing outlandish in the movie. Interestingly
enough, JFK has been lambasted much more furiously than was
the first revisionist movie, Don Freed's Executive
Action (1973), an exciting film with Robert Ryan and Will
Geer, which actually did go way beyond the evidence, and
beyond plausibility, by trying to make an H.L. Hunt figure the main
conspirator.
The evidence
is now overwhelming that the orthodox Warren legend, that Oswald
did it and did it alone, is pure fabrication. It now seems clear
that Kennedy died in a classic military triangulation hit, that,
as Parkland Memorial autopsy pathologist Dr. Charles Crenshaw has
very recently affirmed, the fatal shots were fired from in front,
from the grassy knoll, and that the conspirators were, at the very
least, the right-wing of the CIA, joined by its long-time associates
and employees, the Mafia. It is less well established that President
Johnson himself was in on the original hit, though he obviously
conducted the coordinated cover-up, but certainly his involvement
is highly plausible.
The
last-ditch defenders of the Warren view cannot refute the details,
so they always fall back on generalized vaporings, such as: "How
could all the government be in on it?" But since Watergate,
we have all become familiar with the basic fact: only a few key
people need be in on the original crime, while lots of high and
low government officials can be in on the subsequent cover-up, which
can always be justified as "patriotic," on "national security" grounds,
or simply because the president ordered it. The fact that the highest
levels of the U.S. government are all-too capable of lying to the
public, should have been clear since Watergate and Iran-Contra.
The final fallback argument, getting less plausible all the time
is: if the Warren case isn't true, why hasn't the truth come out
by this time? The fact is, however, that the truth has largely
come out, in the assassination industry, from books some
of them best-sellers by Mark
Lane, David Lifton, Peter
Dale Scott, Jim
Marrs, and many others, but the Respectable Media pay no attention.
With that sort of mindset, that stubborn refusal to face reality,
no truth can ever come out. And yet, despite this blackout, because
books, local TV and radio, magazine articles, supermarket tabloids,
etc. can't be suppressed but only ignored by the Respectable
Media, we have the remarkable result that the great majority of
the public, in all the polls, strongly disbelieve the Warren legend.
Hence, the frantic attempts of the Establishment to suppress as
gripping and convincing a film as Stone's JFK.
Conservatives,
as well as centrists, are smearing JFK because Stone is a
notorious leftist. Well, so what? It is not simply that the ideology
of the teller has no logical bearing on the truth of the tale. The
case is stronger than that. For in a day when the Moderate Left
to Moderate Right constitute an increasingly monolithic Establishment,
with only nuanced variations among them, we can only get the truth
from people outside the Establishment, either on the far right or
far left, or even from the highly non-respectable supermarket tabloids.
And it is no accident that it is an open secret that the heroic
"Deep Throat" figure in JFK is Colonel Fletcher Prouty, who
is certainly no leftist. And one of the outstanding Revisionist
writers is the long-time libertarian Carl Oglesby.
One particularly
welcome aspect of JFK, by the way, is its making Jim Garrison
the central heroic figure. Garrison, one of the most viciously smeared
figures in modern political history, was simply a district attorney
trying to do his job in the most important criminal case of our
time. Kevin Costner's expressionless style fits in well with the
Garrison role, and Tommy Lee Jones is outstanding as the evil CIA-businessman
conspirator Clay Shaw.
All
in all, a fine movie, for the history as well as the cinematics.
There are some minor problems. It is unfortunate that the founding
Kennedy Revisionist, Mark Lane, felt that he had to leave the movie-making
early, with the result that the film does not bring out the crucial
testimony of Cuban ex-CIA agent Marita Lorenz, who has identified
right-wing CIA operative E. Howard Hunt, Bill Buckley's pal and
control in the CIA, as paymaster for the assassination. (See the
brilliant new book by Lane, Plausible Denial.) According
to Lane, heat from the CIA during the filming led Stone to underplay
the CIA's role by spreading the blame a little too thickly to the
rest of the Johnson administration.
As the case
for revisionism piles up, there is evidence that some of the more
sophisticated members of the Establishment are preparing to jettison
the Warren legend, and fall back on an explanation less threatening
than blaming E. Howard Hunt or the CIA: that is to lay blame solely
on the Mafia, specifically on Sam Giancana, Johnny Roselli, and
Jimmy Hoffa, none of whom are around to debate the issue. A convincing
attack on the Mafia-only thesis was leveled by Carl Oglesby in his
Afterward to Jim Garrison's book of a few years back (which formed
one of the bases for JFK) On
the Trail of the Assassins.
The Mafia simply did not have the resources, for example, to change
the route or call off military or Secret Service protection.
Many conservatives
and libertarians will surely be irritated by one theme of the film:
the old-fashioned view of Kennedy as the shining young prince of
Camelot, the great hero about to redeem America who was chopped
down in his prime by dark reactionary forces. That sort of
attitude has long been discredited by a very different kind of Revisionism
as tales have come out about the sleazy Kennedy brothers,
Judith Exner, Sam Giancana, Marilyn Monroe, et al. Well, OK, but
look at it this way: a president was murdered, for heaven's
sake, and good, bad, or indifferent, it is surely vital to get to
the bottom of the conspiracy, and bring the villains to justice,
if only at the bar of history. Let the chips fall where they may.
One happy result
of the film was the conclusive Stoneian argument: if everything
is on the up and up, why not open up all the secret government files
on the assassination? It looks as if the pressure for opening will
win out, but once again, phony "national security" will prevail,
so we won't get the really incriminating stuff. And some
of the crucial material is long gone, e.g., the famed Kennedy brain,
which mysteriously never made it into the National Archives.
Murray
N. Rothbard (19261995) was the author of Man,
Economy, and State, Conceived
in Liberty, What
Has Government Done to Our Money, For
a New Liberty, The
Case Against the Fed, and many
other books and articles. He was
also the editor with Lew Rockwell of The
Rothbard-Rockwell Report.
Copyright
© 2007 Ludwig von Mises Institute
All rights reserved.
Murray
Rothbard Archives
|