Alex Jones’ appalling understanding of the Kennedy assassination led
him to endorse the dubious documentary JFK 2 and the equally
specious Family of Secrets. As Jim DiEugenio and myself have
shown elsewhere on this site, both of these works are very questionable
on the relation of George Bush to the Kennedy case. Therefore, it was
decided a piece on Jones himself would be a fitting end to CTKA’s journey
to the outer limits of rhyme, reason, and research. And to show the difference
between Jonestown and what Len Osanic has termed the Legion
This is not a review of Jones’ upcoming assassination
documentary on the JFK case. Actually, it’s more a warning about it.
While I worked on it, it was interesting to note that the majority of
the general criticism directed at Jones seems to come from three camps: (1) those individuals
who appear to be jealous of his prominent status; (2) those who felt they had been burned by
him in some way; or (3) from paranoid anti-Semitic individuals who are even more
unhinged than Jones is. (Often it’s a combination of all three.) Jones is
so polarizing within his own crank territory, that it was hard to find
any credible voices in critique of him. I hope this fills that gap.
The Ministry of Rev. Jones
In 1996, Jones began his inauspicious rise from community TV in Austin,
Texas on a show called Final Edition. From there, the privileged
son of a successful dentist (and alleged John Birch Society member) from
the wealthy city of Rockwell has become the Internet conspiracy king.
His company has spewed forth a number of websites: Prison Planet.com,Prison
Planet.tv, Infowars.com, Infowars.Net and the Jones Report (to
avoid confusion herein, Jones sites will be referred to as Prison-Planet).
Jones’ organization also runs the Ron Paul War Room.
Prison Planet.com seems to serve more or less as Jones’ promotional
vehicle for his radio shows. While Infowars.net contains a number
of news stories on things like FEMA concentration camps, heroic teabaggers,
illegal immigrants, and so on, it is really more or less a link site that tends
to feature bullion as its top story (there’s a reason for this). Prisonplanet.tv is
primarily multimedia based. The Jones Report is the least updated
of the sites and seems to be a collection of Jones’ “best of” stories and,
it seems, longer essays.
Jones’ web page assault provided an interesting dilemma for
study. As it was often hard to know whether or not he had omitted anything,
or if a particular article, link, or interview about any given topic was
buried at some other location. Thus, any critic is bound to have stated
at some point that Jones has not covered an issue when he may well have.
This is no victory for Jones however. It’s a big problem. His accumulation
of articles appears to be a calculated move to dominate search engines and thus lasso
much contemporary dissent under his own rubric, which, in turn, brings large sums of money: The
more hits, the more advertising revenue and merchandise sales for Jones and
his close friend, Ted “Goldfinger” Anderson. (Anderson is not only the owner of the Genesis media network, but also a gold speculator. Researcher JP Mroz informs me that Anderson is also something of a hustler, apparently being a little loose with the truth concerning investments
in his metal stocks.)
Thus, like any mainstream news network Jones criticizes, he casts a wide
net: not for truth, but for profit. Hence,
Jones is more or less akin to a fundamental Christian televangelist.
Like many televangelists, Jones worships at an altar of religion and
hypocrisy. His religion is that of conspiracy, and like many evangelicals
(some of whom probably watch his shows), he has taken the teachings of
his faith far too literally. In so doing, Jones has melded a unique outlook one could call
either “conspirahypocrisy” or “conspiravangelism.”
These two terms are worth keeping in mind. Because though Reverend Jones often
advises his flock to find out information for themselves, at the same time
he implores his followers to distribute his videos for “educational purposes” and
to “wake up” others and buy his products to get the truth. But retail
is only one aspect of Jones’ operation. In fact, with the next step he takes,
there is little difference between him and the god-awful cheese of Benny Hinn.
In true Benny Hinn Ministries fashion, he exhorts his
supporters to help fund his ministry to the tune of some $275,000 with
“money bombs” to help him expand and fight the New World Order. He also receives massive donations from Christian businessmen, who have paid up to $50,000 for Jones’ bullhorn, which he auctions as a means to expand his studio facilities. Unsurprisingly, Jones has become quite wealthy. How wealthy? That is uncertain. Jones keeps extremely quiet about his personal fortune. But most bloggers put
it in the millions.
Let us digress from religion and return to Jones’ accumulation
of information for, what amounts to, profit. Jim DiEugenio has stressed
on numerous occassions that there is nothing wrong with profiting from
research. For example, Jim Douglass, author of the thought-provoking
and the Unspeakable, certainly deserves to reap the
rewards of the fruits of his labor; as do Mark Lane, Oliver Stone, Jim
Marrs, and Dave Talbot—further examples of dedicated researchers
who have, by their discriminating focus, contributed positively to the
case. In contrast, Jones casts his net so wide that he not only scoops
up all things good, like say, John Pilger, Lisa Pease, and Greg Palast,
but he also takes in—or rather, is taken in by— the
wild-eyed kookery of Kathy O’Brien, Robert Gaylon Ross, David Icke,
and numerous others. He then minces it all together in cans ready for
sale with no regard for how polluted the blend or dreadful the taste. Furthermore,
there is very little quality control, which means cross-contamination
(factually incorrect and contradictory positions) becomes commonplace. This
results in, as we shall see, a wild, goofy, circus-type atmosphere in which
almost anything can be said without thought or fear of reprimand.
Conspirahypocrisy in Action
A classic example of Jones’ conspirahipocrisy is that he will stop at
nothing to make figures like the Bush family the ultimate evil of the
age. A July 24th, 2009, Huffington Post press release discussing
Oliver Stone’s praise of Jim Douglass’ book, JFK and the Unspeakable, was
placed on Prison Planet. Yet Prison Planet’s good work
in mentioning this fine book is quickly scuttled: A search or so later on the Inforwars website turns up
a glowing article from May 2009 citing the credentials of Lamar Waldron’s
ridiculous Legacy of Secrecy.
Why Lamar Waldron? Well, Waldron (as per his schtick) has tried to cash
in on making Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld key figures in the undermining of
senate investigations like the Church Committee in the mid-seventies, when
any number of Republicans were guilty of crimes. As if being
sucked in by Waldron wasn’t bad enough, Jones showed his peculiar form
of amnesia by having Vince Bugliosi on his show in May of 2008 discussing his book on
the Iraq War. The problem is that Jones obviously hadn’t
seen Bugliosi’s 2007 appearance on The Colbert Report, or his numerous
talks on YouTube promoting his Reclaiming History, a 2,700
page panegyric for the Warren Commission.
Feminisim & Rockefellers
Despite many of his guests being to the right and no doubt bigoted, in
fairness, it has to be said that Prison Planet seems to be a more
or less non-racist organization. But Jones is definitely something of
a sexist. In one broadcast, Jones took it upon himself
to lecture women about their being targeted by advertising (as if women
haven’t understood this for years) and being mislead by environmental
groups. To top it off, Jones once stole a line from the ever sexist Henry Makow,
about how sitcoms have modeled negative and subservient male behaviors.
And it gets worse. Women who consider themselves feminists are by far
the most manipulated members of their gender. That’s according to the
late (but not great) Aaron Russo. In his last ever interview (conducted
by Jones), Russo discussed the cold dark truth that the world’s elites
are socialists and that feminism was created by the Rockefellers. Jones
enthusiastically mentioned that Gloria Steinem, the leader of the U.S
feminist movement, had been exposed as a long-term CIA informant.
Judging from this 2007 Jones/Russo conversation, it is obvious that neither had been aware
of the fact that it was a socialist-feminist group, Red
Stockings, that had actually exposed Steinem. Jones also displayed no knowledge
that the CIA and FBI had infiltrated numerous progressive movements,
not just this socialist-feminist one. This is highly ironic in light of the next
area of discussion.
The Grandstanding Orwellian Orwell Fan
In 2008, at a peaceful rally in which protestors attempted to recreate
the 1967 "levitation of the Pentagon" at the Denver Mint, an
crashed the party and harangued neo-conservative, quasi-fascist
Michelle Malkin. How anybody could usurp someone else’s event and then have some of the left-leaning
protestors stick up for a woman dubbed “The Asian Ann Coulter” shows
a certain talent for the inept, and an extreme need for headline grabbing.
And Jones’ grandstanding appears to know no limits. There is a cleverly edited
clip on YouTube entitled, Alex Jones Using Cointelpro Tactics?, in
which Jones discusses the FBI’s COINTELPRO operation. Yet the clip also
reveals Jones as a self-aggrandizing egomaniac ruining a pro-gun rally
in Austin that, once again, he did not organize. (Please also see: Alex Jones is Still a Jackass.) In fact, as one can see from clicking through to the article, it was
Jones who came in and disrupted the rally, essentially hijacking it for
his own purposes, making it into a circus. In that regard, he is the
P. T. Barnum of conspiracy politics and activism. It is this unique blend
of conspirahypocrisy which turns Jones into “The Orwellian Orwell
Jones often uses the term “Orwellian” to describe seemingly any event.
In fact, Jones has made a major presentation about Orwell. (And his many
inaccuracies therein are worthy of another critique.) The fact that Jones
and the lunatic fringe utilize the works of a known Democratic Socialist
and other decidedly left-leaning individuals like Aldous Huxley and Phillip
K. Dick (who, if living, would most certainly shun the likes of Jones) is a classic example
of how little analysis pervades his unique blend of right-wing pseudo-libertarian ideology.
At its core, the Jones’ network believes that the
left and right argument is a convenient government con job.How
would Eric Arthur Blair (Orwell) respond to this gibberish that Jones
spewed at the reopening of the Branch Davidian Church at Waco on September
19th, 1999? : “Victory is ours against the New World Order, against the Communists,
Socialists, and the Bankers that run the whole filthy show!”
As seen in The Dark Legacy of John Hankey, Hankey
has a bad habit of claiming things he never achieved. So does Jones.
In fairness to both Hankey and Jones, this sort of thing abounds in the
competitive world of conspiracy demagoguery. It’s a world in which all
members are guilty of reinventing history at one time or another: A very Ministry
of Truth-like crime.
Here are but some shining examples:
Jones has made a big deal about his infiltration of Bohemian Grove. While
he was indeed the first to film the “cremation of care ceremony,”
Jones barely acknowledges that it was made possible by English journalist
Jon Ronson. Ronson filmed Jones prior to his foray into the grove, in
the episode “The Satanic shadowy elite.” Ronson’s measured viewpoint
about the proceedings can be seen in
an excerpt from his notable book, Them:
Adventures with Extremists.
A few years later, Jones propagated the myth that he was the first radio
commentator to announce 9/11 style attacks on America. Except he was
not. It was the equally kooky —and depending on whom you talk to—“spooky” Bill
Cooper. Cooper detested Jones shtick and called him a liar and sensationalist.
Cooper, however, was another conspirahypocrite of ludicrous JFK assassination
theories. Namely, that Kennedy’s limousine driver turned around and shot
Kennedy in the head. The footage Cooper used to sell this idea was an
extremely old 8th generation copy of the Zapruder film which has been
soundly debunked by Zapruder film expert Robert Groden. (Please see:
Jim DiEugenio; Black Op Radio, Show #470, April 15, 2010.)
In Orwell’s 1984, The Ministry of Truth had the job of turning one-time
enemies into long-time allies and vice-versa. Jones has done the same
thing. He once denounced David Icke as a potential disinformation agent,
likening his “reptilian lizard man” theory to being a “turd
in the punch bowl.” Yet Icke’s patronage enabled Jones to patch
into the “moon unit” market and the “lizard man” is now something of
a regular on his show. Jones is also a pretty poor representative of
free speech he claims for us all, since there are a number of websites
devoted to individuals whom he has had kicked off his forums.
Is There Life on Marrs? ...There’s a little, but Jones missed
It’s highly ironic, that Jones was born at Parkland Hospital, the place
where JFK died. Because with his and his cronies’ (e.g., Jason Bermas and
Paul Watson) limited knowledge of the assassination and what actually
occurred, you would think Kennedy had just checked in for a sore throat,
pulled back muscle, and a headache.
While interviewing author Jim Marrs on his radio show, Jones showed
a noticeable lack of knowledge about his book Crossfire which,
along with Jim Garrison’s On the Trail of the Assassins, had
a huge influence on the direction of Oliver Stone’s film JFK. Now,
considering the limitations of the day, both books were solid pieces
of work. But therein lies a problem. New books by the likes of
Jim Douglass and Gerald McKnight have been able to capitalize on a plethora
of released documents unavailable to Marrs at the time. By comparison,
Garrison’s work (for the most part) hasn’t dated so badly because of
its singular focus on his case bought against Clay Shaw. Also, many of
Garrison’s suspicions about Guy Banister, David Ferrie, and Clay Shaw
have, in large part, been borne out. Many subjects in Marrs’ book, like
LBJ, body alteration, and Madeleine Brown, amongst others, have not.
The film JFK has been able to update its information via special
editions with additional interviews, A-V essays, and director commentaries.
One wonders though, has anybody out there in the Jones’ nexus actually
bothered to sit down and listen to any of them? Not likely. The problem
is that many conspiravangelists, have become stuck in something of an
HSCA and JFK time-warp. It is as if nothing happened before or after
this period. These earlier vehicles—The Men Who Killed Kennedy and the first editions
of JFK and Crossfire—have become
virtual bibles to many unwitting newcomers who are little aware of their
limitations. Jones falls into this category, and that’s without apparently
even having read the Marrs’ book.
A Short Dissection!
July 27th, 2006 interview with Marrs began to break into the bizarre
shortly after the 9-minute mark. It is here that Alex Jones shows who
he is and what he knows about the Kennedy case.
9:19 Minutes: JFK, Blueblood Scion of The Eastern Establishment: Jones
kicked off proceedings by absurdly stating that Kennedy “Came from ‘blue
blood’ elites.” How on earth anyone could think of JFK, a 2nd generation
Irish Catholic, as being a waspish member of the Eastern establishment is beyond
9:36 Minutes:Johnson and Pussy Galore: Almost
on top of Jones “blue blood” call, he then promotes Madeleine Brown. Brown
may have met Democratic congressman Lyndon Johnson at a party in 1948 in Austin,
and may have been one of his many female friends. It’s ironic that Johnson
purportedly bestowed the name Pussy Galore on her because Miss Galore,
like Brown, is a fiction. (Bennett Woods, LBJ Architect of American Ambition,
pg, 247). Brown’s most way-out claim is that
she was present at a secret party
in Texas where Richard Nixon, John McLoy, J. Edgar Hoover, LBJ, and oil baron
Clint Murchison, Sr.—or his son Junior, depending on whose concocted story
you read—and other luminaries planned Kennedy’s assassination on the evening of the 21st
of November, 1963.
Firstly, Johnson himself was seen by a few thousand people and filmed
that night in the company of President Kennedy at the Houston Coliseum.
Johnson didn’t arrive in Fort Worth until 11.05 pm on the night of the
21st of November, and it is roundly reported that he wound up his day
in the same hotel at a very late hour with his advisors. (William Manchester, Death
of a President, pgs. 135, 138).
The same goes for Dick Nixon, who was in town that night with Joan Crawford.
This was widely reported in the Dallas press and was still being reported
until fairly late that evening. (The Dallas Morning News, Friday,
November 22, 1963, Section 1-19) Kai Bird’s autobiography describes John
McCloy hearing the news of the assassination while having breakfast with
former President Eisenhower. (The Chairman, p. 544) As for Hoover,
according to Anthony Summers, it is highly likely (to the point of absolute
certainty) that J. Edgar Hoover, like McCloy, was nowhere near Texas
at the time. For instance, the next day he was calling Bobby Kennedy
from his Washington office at around 1:34 P.M EST with news of the shooting.
(Summers, Official and Confidential, p. 394). In fact, in none
of the standard biographies of Hoover—Powers, Theoharis, Gentry, or Summers—does
anyone note him being in Texas that evening.
A Dallas-to-Washington round trip is around 3-4 hours each way. Why would
two very powerful and highly visible 68-year-olds fly to Dallas, Texas
to meet with Johnson at some ungodly hour, well after 11:00 P.M CST,
compromising themselves in the process, and then fly back from Dallas,
arriving home anywhere between 3:00-5:00 AM the following morning? Why
do all that when a sinister meeting in Washington could have easily been
arranged prior to events. And anyway, as Jim DiEugenio has said, the
idea of organizing the plot just a night before is silly (Please see:
Jim DiEugenio; Black Op Radio, Show #476, May 28, 2010.)
Hoover, the supposed major conspirator, had believed someone was impersonating
Oswald in Russia. Furthermore, during Oswald’s absence on his way to
the Soviet Union, it took the FBI and the Swiss authorities months to
find the Albert Schweitzer College—which Oswald had supposedly planned
But it just keeps getting worse for those in the Hoover “plotter” scenario.
Hoover once said to President Johnson that the evidence was not strong
enough against Oswald to get a conviction, and like Nicholas Katzenbach,
said that the public needed to be assured Oswald was the lone assassin.
We know some
14 minutes of tape were removed from a conversation Hoover
had with Johnson. We also know that Hoover believed someone was impersonating Oswald in Mexico City.
(John Armstrong, Harvey and Lee, p. 651) Hoover, himself, would go on to later describe how
the United States government would be rocked to the core by the real
truth about the Kennedy murder, and he would also call the case “a mess,
a lot of loose ends.” (Summers, Official and Confidential, pgs.
One of the only researchers I know of who has advocated for Hoover’s
involvement is Peter Dale Scott, whom we shall touch on later (Peter
Dale Scott; Deep Politics and the Death of JFK, pgs. 242-267).
Had Jones (or his researchers) ever bothered to look around the Kennedy
critical community, he would have found that potential “Johnson
did it” allies—like Doug Weldon—repeatedly tried to interview and
question Brown with legitimate questions; yet she constantly evaded such questioning. (Doug
Weldon: Spartacus Education Forum, post of 4/25/10)
But the hypocrisy and contradiction surrounding Brown continues unabated.
Jones’ top researcher, Paul Watson, makes a big deal about Johnson’s highly
improbable statement to Brown, “Those SOB’s will never embarrass
me again.” What Watson doesn’t tell anybody is that Johnson had
also told Brown that oilmen and the CIA had killed Kennedy. The evidence
clearly shows that Johnson had grave doubts about the assassination,
and was unconvinced, as was Hoover, with the evidence days after the
assassination. (Gerald McKnight, Breach of Trust, p. 283) And
at one point, according to Fletcher Prouty,
he even asked J. Edgar Hoover if any shots had been fired at him.
In 1967, Johnson remarked to aide Marvin Watson that the “CIA had
something to do with this plot.” (Summers, Official and Confidential, p.
414.) Leo Janos’ Atlantic Monthly article, The Last
Days of The President: LBJ in Retirement, which was printed
in July of 1973—just six months after Johnson’s death, provides us with perhaps
the starkest appraisal of Johnson’s mindset in later life:
During coffee, the talk turned to President Kennedy, and Johnson
expressed his belief that “the assassination in Dallas had been part of a conspiracy.”
A little later Johnson said “I never believed that Oswald acted alone,
although I can accept that he pulled the trigger.” Johnson said that when
he had taken office he found that “we had been operating a damned Murder,
Inc. in the Caribbean.” (Atlantic Monthly, July 1973)
Recently released documents citing Godfrey McHugh’s observations of Johnson’s
paranoid behavior on Air Force One have cast further doubt on the Johnson-did-it angle.
Yet in an odd piece of face-saving for the dwindling Johnson
lobby, Paul Joseph Watson, one of the brains behind Prison Planet’s internet
information apparatus, believes Johnson on Air Force One to be play-acting
to draw suspicion from himself. In doing so, Watson ignored all of Johnson’s
previous comments. He utilized Saint John Hunt and Madeleine Brown (arguably
two of the least inspiring witnesses the research community has come
to bolster his case that Johnson was likely hamming it up.
Had Watson bothered to read David Talbot’s Brothers, he would
have seen that Johnson panicked at Parkland and told Mac Kilduff that
he wanted the announcement of JFK’s death to be delayed till he was safely
on the plane, stating his belief in a potential “world-wide conspiracy.” Johnson’s
performance at Parkland Hospital and on Air Force One was certainly
not mugging. (Talbot, pgs 282-285) It would be interesting to see how
Jones, Watson, or anyone else for that matter, would explain away the
fact that within hours of Oswald’s death, Johnson’s Cabinet and Justice
Department were convinced by Eastern Establishment figures Eugene Rostow
and Joe Alsop to take the investigation out of Texas and back to Washington.
Whereupon, Allen Dulles—and not the mythical Johnson—would
become ringmaster of the investigation. (Donald Gibson, The Assassinations, pgs
9:38 Minutes: “Below Par” McClellan: Sure enough, Jones soon spits out
the name of Barr McClellan. And in deference to the imagined strength
of the Brown and McClellan stories, utters a pure Jones/Barnum piece of
oversized hyperbole: “It seems to be an Ironclad case.” Like
Brown’s tome, Texas in the Morning, McClellan’s very bad book, Blood,
Money & Power, pinning the crime on Johnson, is regularly touted
around the Jones Internet nexus. In fact, when McClellan’s book came out, Jones had
him on his show for a solid hour, and after the show, pronounced that
LBJ had killed Kennedy. One of its main selling points was the disputed
Mac Wallace fingerprint supposedly found in the TSBD (Texas School Book
Depository). However, John Kelin found that different groups of Johnson-did-it
advocates at the time
disagreed on its validity.
But the rest of the McClellan book was so bad that even researchers like
Walt Brown—a generally well-known non-kook advocate of the “Johnson
did it” club, and no relation to Madeleine Brown—eventually distanced
himself from McClellan’s dubious work, which he had once supported. This
is what Walt Brown was quoted as saying in public on various Internet forums
after the book was issued:
I have no reason to think that his (McClellan’s) work is in
any way an attempt at deceit, but at the same time, I have no answers
to the “why?” of how it went from a solid, stand-on-its-own-legs work
in July to an almost fictionalized account in October.
Alex Constantine is one of the few individuals within the rabid conspiracy
circuit who doesn’t try and make out that every man and his dog were
involved in the case. In a post at his web site of 7/6/2008 he wrote
that McClellan’s son Scott had strong links to Jones’ Great Satan, the
Bush clan. How Jones and his crew didn’t pick up on this and run with
it is quite puzzling.
11:00 Minutes: Operation Northwoods: (The full details of what
Northwoods was about can be seen at the Operation Northwoods page
at the Mary Ferrell Foundation. And an interesting twist to the Northwoods
tale can be read in the addendum to part II of this essay, which will
be available shortly.)
As if what had transpired earlier on in the interview was not bad enough,
Jones made another alarming faux pas, i.e., that the Operation Northwoods
proposal in 1962 led Kennedy to sack a number of high ranking officials
in the CIA and military. In so doing, Jones clearly implied that the Kennedys’
refusal of the Northwoods proposal was part of what got him killed. Thankfully, Jim
Marrs corrected Jones. Marrs then reminded Jones that Kennedy’s
sacking rampage had occurred a year earlier in 1961. And it was actually
caused by the culmination of the investigations into the planning and
ill execution of the CIA’s Bay of Pigs invasion. As a result, its prime
organizers—Allen Dulles, Dick Bissell, and Charles Cabell—were terminated.
As for Northwoods, Kennedy did not react to it in any way except in rejecting
it. There is also no evidence that Lyman Lemnitzer, Chair of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, was fired as a result. Lemnitzer had long been an obstacle
to the Kennedys, and his contract as head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
was simply not renewed. Had he not proposed Northwoods, he would not
have been kept on anyhow, as the Kennedys had long wanted Maxwell Taylor
in the position. Lemnitzer moved on to be the head of NATO. (Talbot, pgs.
Thanks—but No Thanks—for the Assist
Now, some might say that my using a 2006 interview with Marrs is unfair.
Jones could probably have learned from his mistakes about Northwoods
and the like. After all, Marrs had corrected some of them. And Jones must
care about accuracy because the precise historical record is what he
is supposed to be about. I mean, that is what he is selling: an alternative
view of history that is much more close to the facts than the MSM’s version.
Well, what I am about to say brings this all into question. Because two
years later Jones got worse, not better. And this is an important point,
not just about Jones and his business empire, but also about his respect
for history and the JFK case.
The JFK murder is clearly the event that
ripped open the guts of the so-called American Century of Henry Luce.
Jim Hougan and Don DeLillo have both described the JFK case as the event
that tore open the dark underside of the American political system, one
that had been previously hidden from the public. And it was this exposure
which gave birth to serious alternative thinking and explanations about
large historical events. It would later give birth to a whole new literature
of revisionist history. Well, by any standard, Jones flunked his test;
in two years, he hadn’t learned a thing. In 2008, Jim Marrs
introduced Jones to Debra Conway, co-founder of
JFK Lancer, at Lancer’s November in
Dallas conference. Anybody with a genuine interest
in the case would have to be particularly incompetent not to have come across
Conway somehow, somewhere. Jones, who maintains he has a high level
of interest in the case, seemed to have never heard of either Conway or her JFK
Lancer. (Conway: email of July 25th, 2010)
If this wasn’t bad enough, Jones’ defense of
Jesse Ventura during his Howard Stern interview on the 21st of May
of 2008 was, in a word, embarrassing. Jones makes
sensible observers, like his friend Ventura, look as bad as himself.
Ventura needs the likes of Jones and Jason Bermas like he needs
Dan Rather. The errors the two made concerning the deaths of JFK
and RFK are shocking, as was their labelling others as exaggerating
kooks. (Please see—YouTube video:
Alex Jones Jason Bermas Howard Stern Jesse Ventura)
At 6:46 into Jones’ spiel, he says that 90% of Americans believe the
government killed Kennedy. Every anniversary there are polls. On the 35th anniversary of Kennedy’s death in 1998, a
CBS poll found that 74% of Americans believed that Oswald did NOT act alone. For the 40th anniversary in 2003,
ABC poll found that “70% of Americans ... believed there was some sort of plot behind the killings.”
And the Discovery Channel and the History Channel have repsectively polled
a 79% and an 83% belief by Americans in a conspiracy.
None of these cited poll numbers are anywhere near
the mystical 90% mark Jones conjured up out of thin air.
Jones then mangles further Shane O’Sullivan’s already dubious and orphaned
claims about who was at the Ambassador Hotel the night RFK was killed.
Read this carefully for it is shocking:
They’ve now come out on BBC, NBC, showing the film footage
of the Ambassador Hotel. Three CIA section chiefs from Asia, the
famous guys involved with Kennedy—JFK as well; it’s admitted the
guy who shot RFK behind him, ahhh, who the coroner said shot him—from
behind, Mr. Cesar, was CIA. We have the footage of all these guys
there directing Cesar and others right before it happens.
Jones was obviously unaware that Paul Watson’s team (in a rare moment
of research competence) actually had the foresight to publish Lisa Pease’s
November 2006 misgivings about Shane O’Sullivan’s appearance on BBC2’s NewsNight
Programme on November the 20th, 2006. This was not posted on the Infowars website
until March 23rd 2008. Jones’ clueless dialogue, with an equally clueless
Jason Bermas, about Shane O’Sullivan’s mistake about the RFK case, occurred
almost two months later—to the day—on May the 22nd of 2008. Thus once
again, in true Prison Planet style, Jones exposes himself as
a dilettante who, far from elucidating and leading and empowering his
listeners, actually confuses, misleads, and marginalizes them as ill-informed
Three CIA section chiefs from Asia? (Asia? Where on earth did he get
that from?) For most of the period of 1962-68 all were around the JM
WAVE station in Miami. They were, according to O’Sullivan, Gordon Campbell,
George Johannides, and Dave Morales. Campbell, who was never a figure
of significance in the Kennedy assassination, and never a high-ranking
CIA official, died in 1962. (Talbot, p. 397) Which is significant, since
that is six years before RFK’s assassination. Johannides was a leader
of psychological operations at the JM Wave Station, not a “section
chief.” Furthermore, the photo shows slight resemblance, bar glasses,
between O’Sullivan’s suspect and Johannides. And
the evidence says he
was in Athens circa 1968. However, Johannides
is a genuine figure of interest in the John Kennedy (not RFK) assassination,
as Talbot mentions in his book. (p. 397) As for Morales, he is said
to be the individual supposedly waving people into position, yet he is
a grainy figure that can barely be distinguished. Further, the photo
comparisons never actually matched. (See Morley and Talbot.)
But actually, it’s even worse than that for Jones. Because in 2007, in
O’Sullivan’s film RFK Must Die, and his book Who Killed Bobby?, O’Sullivan
found LAPD documents showing that the two men whom he once took for Johannides
and Campbell were actually Bulova watch company employees. And this has
been certified by family members. (O’Sullivan, pgs. 469-70)
Obviously, if the men are not who Jones says they are—and they are not—they
cannot be, as he says, "directing Cesar and others right before
Remember, this show was broadcast in 2008. All this material correcting
the record was published a year previous. With all the millions Jones
rakes in, how much does he spend on quality control and fact-checking?
His listeners, if they want accurate information—or at least an attempt
at it—have a right to ask him this question.
Jones does get something right. Thomas Noguchi, the Los Angeles coroner
did believe that Kennedy was shot from behind (Lisa Pease and James DiEugenio
editors, The Assassinations, pgs. 616-618). But he never said,
at least in public, that Cesar did it. The evidence surrounding Cesar
as one of the shooters is compelling. But we must note, it is compelling,
not proven. For instance, it has not been “admitted” by anyone that Cesar
was CIA. He seems to come from a complex cabal within the Bob
Maheu, Richard Helms, and Howard Hughes nexus. Whether or not the companies
he worked for prior to the assassination were all CIA fronts or proprietaries
is another question altogether. (Ibid, pgs. 602-606)
We now have the son releasing the video, we have the audio,
the guy who was photographed at being at the scene by The Dallas
Morning News and Dallas Times Herald, and that, of course, is E.
Howard Hunt. I mean, Jason, when does it end?
Yes Alex, when does it end? Saint John, like his father, is a character
of curious moral fiber. If one wants to see just how curious, I advise
they skip ahead and read the following section “Alex Jones and the Saint.”
How Jones can continually refer to Hunt as a credible source is, as you
will see, the epitome of bombast. As for the rest of Jones’ rant, he
seems to be implying that the contested images of the three tramps in
Dealey Plaza taken on 11/22/63 by William Allen of The Dallas Times Herald, Jack
Beers of The Dallas Morning News, and George Smith of The Fort
Worth Star Telegram show one of them as Howard Hunt.
The problem is that when Mark Lane successfully litigated the Liberty
Lobby case, he refused to use those pictures in evidence, as he believed
they weakened his case. A case which, despite using the testimony of
Marita Lorenz, he prevailed in. (Lane, Plausible Denial, pgs.
133-134) Furthermore, the likely identities of the tramps has supposedly
since been discovered, though much conjecture and debate about their
Now Jason Bermas leaps into the fray (Bermas, like Saint John Hunt, is examined
in greater depth later).
But just go to the video tape of the Secret Service by Kennedy
that day. As they’re turning the corner at Dealey Plaza one of the
Secret Service agents at the back of his car actually gets called off.
And he’s not happy about it Alex.
This is what I mean about the issue of quality control and the ethical
question of what a host and his guest owe to their listeners. Listeners
do not deserve to be misled—whether it’s by Dan Rather and Walter Cronkite
or Bermas and Jones. Neither the Bronson, Zapruder, or Altgens films
captured what Bermas is describing; nor did any of the other escorts,
nor the two hundred or so people in the vicinity witness what Burmas describes.
What Bermas was referring to were the actions between the dubious Emory Roberts, who
was in charge of the Secret Service follow-up car, and agent Henry Rybka, whom Roberts ordered
off the presidential limousine—not at the corner of Dealey Plaza’s Houston
and Main, but, quite clearly, at Love Field.
I really, really wish Bermas had not said this. Because his announcement
now sets his master off on a goofy rant for the ages. Again, read the
following carefully. You will completely understand why Jones distributes
John Hankey’s film and interviews Russ Baker for hours.
You got LBJ on the radio behind ’em calling in the assault,
“get ready we’re going on to sniper position 1.” ’Cause, they had kill
zones all the way down to the airport. They were gonna keep, keep, you
know. And they were ready with hand grenade attacks, bazooka attacks.
If they had to, they were going to have military kill ’em and go to full
martial law. They had riot troops in the air from the army flying above
Let’s break this last speech down. Like John Hankey, it’s the only way
one can fully comprehend the complete nonsense that conspirahypocrites
You got LBJ on the radio behind ’em calling in the assault, “get ready
we’re going on to sniper position 1.”
Really Alex? What happened is that Johnson asked Herschel Jacks (not
an agent), to turn the radio on so he could hear reportage of the motorcade
on a local radio station. (William Manchester, The Death of a President, p.
203) Occasionally, he would ask how much further they had to go. Then,
Rufus Youngblood, Johnson’s assigned agent, would radio back to his follow
up car “And ask them how many more miles and so forth.” (Youngblood
Testimony, Warren Commission, Vol. II, p. 151) The closest Johnson ever
got to a walkie-talkie was when Youngblood eventually managed to get
over the seat and protect him. From there, Youngblood was barking orders
to the other agents. (Manchester, pgs. 244-245, Youngblood Testimony,
p. 149). There’s nothing hidden here; Johnson admits
being near Youngblood’s device:
I felt the automobile sharply accelerate, and in a moment
or so Agent Youngblood released me. I ascertained that Mrs. Johnson
and Senator Yarborough were all right. I heard Agent Youngblood speaking
over his radio transmitter. I asked him what had happened. He said
that he was not sure but that he had learned that the motorcade was
going to the hospital. (Johnson Statement: Warren Commission;
Vol V P. 562)
If this evidence isn’t enough for you, how does logic sound? For Johnson
to have coordinated the strike, it meant that he would have had to have
undertaken a truly Hankeyian sleight of hand. Because he was sitting
next to his wife Ladybird and a few feet away from his arch foe, Senator
Ralph Yarbrough. Now, Yarbrough never said anything about Johnson talking
into a radio in his Warren Commission affidavit. (Warren Commission,
Vol. VII pgs. 439-440) Nor did he say anything about Johnson being in
continual radio contact with others to William Manchester in the Death
of the President. (Manchester, pgs. 244-245)
H.B. McClain, the motorcycle policeman whose job it was to shadow Johnson’s
car, like other patrolmen, didn’t much like Johnson’s attitude towards
him and his fellow officers either. He never saw Johnson do anything
of the sort. (Larry Sneed, No More Silence, pgs. 162-169). McLain
has also voiced his belief in a conspiracy
to the author and intimated to myself off camera
that a number of his fellow patrolman had privately
felt the same way. Thousands of people lined the streets that day and no one
saw Johnson speaking into a radio; just like they never saw Secret Service
agents being ordered off of cars at the corner of Houston and Elm Street.
They were gonna keep, keep you know, and they were ready with hand grenade
attacks, bazooka attacks.
It was hard to pick up where all of this came from. There were plenty
of lunatics out there making all kinds of threats against Kennedy. Jones,
however seems to have melded every hare-brained anti-Castro Cuban assassination
scheme into a kind of assassins potpourri. If Jones and others seriously
think that a trained and professional squad of killers would use this
kind of cumbersome equipment, they clearly have no idea of what an assassination
entails, nor could they have read the transcript of a certain Joseph Milteer. Also Alex, how could one pin such an
attempt on any patsy?
Furthermore, there is not a shred of credible evidence that there were
assassination teams dotted all the way through the motorcade. If there
were, why then did they wait until Dealey Plaza? Did Jones realize that
his ludicrous scenario resembles something from a Warner Brothers’ cartoon?
Has he ever realized that one of his more frequent guests, Colonel Craig
Roberts, thought of Dealey Plaza, in particular the knoll, as a good
ambush spot. In fact, it could not have gotten any better. You had a
car slowed down to about 10 MPH. You had high buildings behind the target
so an assassin could get a good elevated shot off. You had a picket fence
in front of the target at an elevation also. Then you had parking lots
in between for a getaway. With a set-up like that, why on earth would
anyone need to call in an assault with bazookas and hand grenades? Do
Jones and Bermas even study covert and clandestine operations? And what
the words “clandestine” and “covert” mean?
If they had to, they were going to have military kill ’em and go to
full martial law. They had riot troops in the air from the army flying above
There is no documented evidence that has come out either before or after
the assassination that the US was going to “go to full martial law.” This
is another of Jones’ Orwellian fantasies. But it gets worse. Jones flagrantly
steals from JFK the film and then gets it totally wrong. Donald
Sutherland (not “Peter” as Jones called him in the Marrs interview), who
played the X/Fletcher Prouty character, actually said this about the
We had a third of a combat division returning from Germany in the
air above the United States at the time of the shooting. The troops were in
the air for possible riot control. (Oliver Stone and Zachary Sklar,
JFK: The Book of the Film, p. 110.)
While there was a combat division returning from Germany at the time,
it was part of a long-term process of repatriation. But it is crucial
that in no way, shape, or form did “X” say anything about them flying above
Dallas. Furthermore, does Jones really think that one third of a combat
division would be enough to enforce martial law upon the United States?
This would be, at the most, 5,000 troops!
CTKA formerly published Probe magazine, the finest assassination
journal ever. The complete set of Probe—seven volumes—will
be available on CD-ROM in the near future. Ordering details will be listed
Order Probe's book,The Assassinations
James DiEugenio and Lisa Pease are co-editors of The
Assassinations, compiling some of the best of Probe's research,
including articles have never appeared online. The
entirely new pieces, including a section on the Malcolm X assassination.
Learn what the media still hasn't told you about the assassinations
of the sixties.
CTKA Chairman Jim DiEugenio provided additional narrative content for
the new DVD release of Oliver Stone's film JFK. Click the link
above to order the DVD. Order the DVD today from Amazon.com!
Read about the earliest Warren Report critics in John Kelin's new book, Praise
from a Future Generation.