>>> "See...Katzenbach memo." <<<
The 11/25/63 Katzenbach memo says that "ALL THE FACTS" regarding Oswald and the assassination should be MADE KNOWN TO THE PUBLIC.
Some "cover-up" memo that was, huh?
Another interesting non-conspiratorial portion of the Katzenbach memo is this part:
"I think this objective may be satisfied by making public as soon as possible a complete and thorough FBI report on Oswald and the assassination."
Do CTers think that Deputy Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach was really talking in some kind of secret code or something when he said that a "complete and thorough FBI report on Oswald and the assassination" should be made public "as soon as possible"?
I.E., was Katzenbach REALLY saying that only a "phony" or a "fake" FBI report about Oswald and the assassination should be made public? Because if Katzenbach really knew about Oswald's rumored involvement with the FBI (and CIA), and Katz was "in" on some cover-up operation from the get-go, he certainly wouldn't REALLY want the FBI to release a "complete and thorough" report concerning Oswald, now would he?
Vincent Bugliosi puts it this way in his JFK book:
"The conspiracy theorists have converted Katzenbach's and Warren's desire to squelch RUMORS that had no basis in fact into Katzenbach's and Warren's desire to suppress the FACTS of the assassination.
"But how could Katzenbach and Warren have known way back then that they had to spell out that ONLY false rumors, rumors without a stitch of evidence to support them, had to be squelched for the benefit of the American public?
"How could they have known back then that there would actually be people like Mark Lane who would accuse men like Warren, Gerald Ford, John Cooper, and so on...of getting in a room and all deciding to deliberately suppress, or not even look for, evidence of a conspiracy to murder the president...or that there would be intelligent, rational, and sensible people of the considerable stature of Michael Beschloss and Evan Thomas who would decide to give their good minds a rest and actually buy into this nonsense?" -- Vincent Bugliosi; Pages 367-368 of "Reclaiming History"
The Katzenbach memo:
Footnote -- Full credit needs to go to Bud here for emphasizing in his previous posts [in early May 2007, HERE and HERE] the Katz memo's "All the facts" language. An excellent observation, as are all of Bud's kook-smashing observations.
Of course, I suppose the conspiracy kooks will shrug off Katzenbach's words as just another ruse of some sort by the people covering up the facts surrounding the assassination.
But if Katzenbach's November 25th memo to Mr. Moyers had, indeed, truly been "conspiratorial" in some fashion, then the CTers have an even bigger (logical) question to answer:
WHY THE HELL WOULD KATZENBACH WRITE SUCH A CRAZY MEMO IN THE FIRST PLACE IF HE WAS "IN" ON A "COVER-UP PLOT"?
David Von Pein
LINK TO ORIGINAL POST (OCTOBER 27, 2007)