JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS
(PART 1152)


JOHN McADAMS SAID:

I've long known this, but I didn't know the audio existed:

Robert F. Kennedy Speaks At San Fernando
Valley State College (March 1968)


According to David Talbot, Bobby [Kennedy] expressed doubts to a lot of people privately, but all his on-the-record comments were supportive of the WC.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Thanks, John. This makes another great addition to my A/V library.

I've actually heard that RFK program before, and I've even linked to it from some of my other videos, but I hadn't realized the stuff about JFK's death was in there.

I've culled the "I stand by the Warren Commission" excerpt for this new video I just added:

video


ANTHONY MARSH SAID:

Yes, you seem to be talking about only his public statements. You don't ever link to his private statements. Maybe you don't understand that some politicians will say one thing in public and believe something else in private. LBJ said in public that The Warren Commission Report was the truth, but in private he said it was a piece of shit. Hoover said in public that there was no conspiracy, but in private he told his aides and the President that Oswald was working for Castro.

Katzenbach did not say that there was not a conspiracy. He said that the public must be convinced that there was not a conspiracy. Everyone in Washington and most WC defenders thought there was a conspiracy, but for the good of the country it must be covered up. So in your mind you are just doing your patriotic duty.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Is that why he told Walter Cronkite in 1969 that he thought there might have been a conspiracy?

Or isn't that '69 Cronkite program considered to be a "public" appearance in your mind, Tony?


DAVID VON PEIN ALSO SAID:

I find it kind of funny (and ironic) that just three minutes after RFK made his "I stand by the Warren Commission Report" remark to a college crowd in California in March of 1968, Bobby also said this:

"You say tell it like it is and tell you the truth, and that's what I intend to do in this campaign. You might not like it, you might not agree with it, but that's what I'm gonna do." -- RFK; 3/25/68

I guess Anthony Marsh must think that Robert F. Kennedy was just lying through his teeth when he said these things within three minutes of each other:

"I stand by the Warren Commission Report. .... You say...tell you the truth, and that's what I intend to do in this campaign. You might not like it, you might not agree with it, but that's what I'm gonna do." -- RFK


JOHN McADAMS SAID:

It's interesting that people who are in thrall of Camelot have to resort to claiming that all the public statements of RFK about the assassination (like the public statements of JFK about Vietnam) were lies.

Actually, I'm inclined to accept David Talbot's claim that RFK expressed private doubts about the possibility of a conspiracy.

To a large degree, these were probably driven by guilt over the possibility that THINGS THAT BOBBY DID (go after the Mafia, try to arrange the assassination of Castro) may have backfired.

But claiming he had any actual knowledge of a conspiracy is going way too far.

Gary Mack told some reporter (in the wake of the RFK, Jr. statements) that Bobby was much like the rest of the population. He had no evidence of a conspiracy, but he had doubts.


JOHN FIORENTINO SAID:

Of course John is right here.

Does anyone honestly believe that if RFK had real evidence of a conspiracy he wouldn't have done something?? Come on....get real.

As for questions, I think everybody has at least some.

Perhaps even some that are disturbing.

I know I do and I'm a "lone nutter."

Frankly, I still make attempts at tracking down loose ends in this case and it's been 50 years!


JOHN McADAMS SAID:

Conspiracists have been claiming that the statement at San Fernando State College had RFK saying that "only the powers of the presidency" would allow him to get to the bottom of the case. That was a lie.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

This is just one more reason (among hundreds) why I wouldn't believe a thing uttered by a JFK conspiracy theorist if my life hung in the balance.

Distortions, lies, misrepresentations, and irrational/unreasonable evaluation of the evidence are the only things you're likely to get from a JFK conspiracy theorist. I think it's pretty much always been that way. And probably always will be. What a shame.

Take the "Secret Service Standdown" garbage that we've had to listen to and endure for lo these many years now. Even after it has been proven (beyond a reasonable doubt anyway) that the "shrugging" SS agent at Love Field was NOT Henry Rybka (it was Donald Lawton instead), there are still the very same "standdown" arguments being put forth by many conspiracists. Even though those CTers know (via Lawton's written SS report) that Lawton was NOT assigned to ride in the motorcade through downtown Dallas on 11/22/63.

But the CTers will just ignore the 11/30/63 report written by Don Lawton, wherein he states that his job on November 22 was "to remain at the airport to effect security for the President's departure". (Evidently that's yet another "fake" report, per the conspiracists.)

That's just one of the latest examples of a conspiracy theory being totally destroyed and debunked. But many conspiracy theorists just don't care. They'll pretend that the "standdown" at Love Field still existed anyway.

And now we have the statement about RFK standing by the Warren Commission Report and also saying, in no uncertain terms whatsoever, that he would NOT re-open the investigation into President Kennedy's death if he were to be elected President in the fall of 1968.

I'm sure there will be many conspiracy advocates, even AFTER listening to that recording of RFK making those statements at San Fernando Valley State College, who will still insist that Robert Kennedy's remarks at San Fernando still support the notion that RFK believed in a conspiracy in his brother's death.

A conspiracy myth is hard to kill. And I think the main reason for that is because conspiracy theorists just simply don't want the myths to die.


ANTHONY MARSH SAID:

For the first time, the official WH photographer Cecil Stoughton was kicked out of the SS car on the Dallas leg of the trip to make room for Kennedy aides Dave Powers and Kenny O'Donnell. So one of the SS agents would have to sit on the rear seat, George Hickey. But one SS agent didn't understand that and he was standing on the running board. When the fourth SS [agent] walking next to the limo went back to the SS car there was no spot left for him to get on, so the agent on the running board realized his mistake and climbed into the back seat.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

In addition to merely making up your own unsubstantiated version for the apparent confusion surrounding the Secret Service car at Love Field (which you just did above), none of that stuff makes a bit of difference anyway (even if it were true).

Why?

Because we know what the Shrugging Man's (Don Lawton's) assignment was on 11/22/63. He was ALWAYS supposed to remain at Love Field. Therefore, WHATEVER the reason was for his "shrugging", we KNOW it wasn't due to him being "left behind" at the airport (as many conspiracy theorists seem to believe).

Plus -- During Lawton's shrugging episode at Love Field, he doesn't make any move toward the Secret Service car -- that is, he doesn't start to get in (or on) the Queen Mary car at all. He just stands there, shrugging and smiling.

If he had really been a part of the team to ride in the Queen Mary (SS) vehicle, why didn't he move toward the car and try to hop aboard? But he didn't do that at all. Why? Because he already knew what his assignment was that day, as proven by his November 30th SS report (seen in CE2554) -- he was going to stay at Love Field.

Why do CTers want to totally ignore that fact?


ANTHONY MARSH SAID:

Ok, maybe I missed it, but I did not see the video of his [Lyndon Johnson's] PRIVATE remarks where he said the Warren Commission Report was a piece of shit. But I have heard his private phone conversations where he talks about it being a conspiracy and the need to cover that up. Maybe you [John McAdams] haven't.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Of course John has never heard any such phone conversation which has President Johnson saying that the JFK assassination was "a conspiracy" with a "need to cover that up". And that's because no such telephone conversation with LBJ exists and never did. Not even these phone calls serve the "conspiracy" and "cover up" purposes you seem to think they serve.

You think Johnson would have RECORDED such talk about there being a need to "cover up" stuff relating to the Kennedy murder case, Tony? You must be dreaming.


JOHN FIORENTINO SAID:

I can think of a few reasons other than "truth" that RFK would publicly state that he would not re-open the Warren Report if he were elected President.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

If Bobby Kennedy had really wanted to re-open the JFK investigation, don't you think that would have been a great way to garner some additional votes during his 1968 campaign for the Presidency (particularly among the young skeptical voters, like those he spoke to at San Fernando Valley State College)?

During his San Fernando talk, it seems to me that RFK shot himself in the foot (from a strategic and political POV) when he said multiple things that didn't set too well with a lot of people in March of '68 -- e.g., saying he would not re-open the investigation into his brother's death and the very unpopular stuff he said about the Vietnam war as it relates to young men who refused to go to Vietnam when drafted.

In short -- Robert F. Kennedy, in my opinion, was very likely speaking TRUTHFULLY at San Fernando State College. If he had truly wanted to re-open the JFK case, it would have been an excellent political move to say so during Campaign '68, especially given the "conspiracy" climate that was blanketing the country at that time, which was shortly after Mark Lane's "Rush To Judgment" book and film came out and also right smack in the middle of Jim Garrison's New Orleans investigation.

David Von Pein
January 21-23, 2013