Le livre de l’historien Martin W. Sandler sur les correspondances de JFK, publié dans l’une des plus prestigieuses maisons d’édition aux États-Unis, est disponible en ebook gratuit.
La seule théorie du complot mentionnée et mise de l’avant par l’éditeur comme « l’une des plus intrigantes » est celle défendue par Michael Collins Piper dans son livre Final Judgment : The Missing Link in the JFK Assassination Conspiracy.
Martin Sandler en conférence à la bibliothèque du Musée John F. Kennedy (51m21s): Je vais vous dire une chose: j’ai trouvé des articles, pas dans des publications disjonctées mais dans des publications très sophistiquées, qui disaient: « Oubliez Lyndon Johnson, oubliez la CIA, oubliez Fidel Castro : le Mossad a tué JFK parce qu’ils étaient bouleversés à cause de ce qu’il avait fait à Ben-Gourion. » Alors, vous voyez, on lâche quelques petites bombes comme celle-ci dans le livre, non prouvées…
Retranscription verbatim des propos de M. Sandler :« I’ll tell you one thing: I found articles – not tripped in publications but in very sophisticated publications – saying, « Forget Lyndon Johnson, forget the CIA, forget Fidel Castro—Mossad killed JFK because they were upset by what he had done to Ben-Gurion. » So you see, we drop a few bombs like this in this book, unproven … »(Historian Martin W. Sandler, Author of The Letters of John F. Kennedy, lecture at the JFK Museum; Nov 16, 2013, CSPAN2 | BookTV @51 min : 21 sec)
The Letters of John F. Kennedy, by Martin Sandler, p.333-341:
In March 1992, Representative Paul Findley of Illinois, wrote in the Washington Report on Middle Eastern Affairs, “It is interesting. . . . to notice that in all the words written and uttered about the Kennedy assassination, Israel’s intelligence agency, the Mossad, has never been mentioned.” Two years later in his book Final Judgment, author Michael Collins Piper actually accused Israel of the crime. Of all the conspiracy theories, it remains one of the most intriguing.
What is indisputable is that, although it was kept out of the eye of both the Press and the Public, a bitter dispute had developped between Israeli prime minister David Ben-Gurion who believed that his nation’s survival depended on it attaining nuclear capability and Kennedy who was vehemently opposed to it. In May 1963, Kennedy wrote to Ben-Gurion explaining why he was convinced that Israel’s pursuit of nuclear weapons capability was a serious threat to world peace.
May 18, 1963
Dear Mr. Prime Minister:
I welcome your letter of May 12 and am giving it careful study.
Meanwhile, I have received from Ambassador Barbour a report of his conversation with you on May 14 regarding the arrangements for visiting the Dimona reactor. I should like to add some personal comments on that subject.
I am sure you will agree that there is no more urgent business for the whole world than the control of nuclear weapons. We both recognized this when we talked together two years ago, and I emphasized it again when I met with Mrs. Meir just after Christmas. The dangers in the proliferation of national nuclear weapons systems are so obvious that I am sure I need not repeat them here.
It is because of our preoccupation with this problem that my Government has sought to arrange with you for periodic visits to Dimona. When we spoke together in May 1961 you said that we might make whatever use we wished of the information resulting from the first visit of American scientists to Dimona and that you would agree to further visits by neutrals as well. I had assumed from Mrs. Meir’s comment that there would be no problem between us on this.
We are concerned with the disturbing effects on world stability which would accompany the development of a nuclear weapons capability by Israel. I cannot imagine that the Arabs would refrain from turning to the Soviet Union for assistance if Israel were to develop a nuclear weapons capability–with all the consequences this would hold. But the problem is much larger than its impact on the Middle East. Development of a nuclear weapons capability by Israel would almost certainly lead other larger countries, that have so far refrained from such development, to feel that they must follow suit.
As I made clear in my press conference of May 8, we have a deep commitment to the security of Israel. In addition this country supports Israel in a wide variety of other ways which are well known to both of us. [4-1/2 lines of source text not declassified]
I can well appreciate your concern for developments in the UAR. But I see no present or imminent nuclear threat to Israel from there. I am assured that our intelligence on this question is good and that the Egyptians do not presently have any installation comparable to Dimona, nor any facilities potentially capable of nuclear weapons production. But, of course, if you have information that would support a contrary conclusion, I should like to receive it from you through Ambassador Barbour. We have the capacity to check it.
I trust this message will convey the sense of urgency and the perspective in which I view your Government’s early assent to the proposal first put to you by Ambassador Barbour on April 2.
John F. Kennedy
In his reply to Kennedy, Ben-Gurion defended his country’s development of a nuclear reactor for both peaceful and military purposes and suggested a time when Dimona would be ready for inspection.
Jerusalem, May 27, 1963
Dear Mr. President,
I have given careful consideration to your letter of May 19 and to Ambassador Barbour’s explanation of your policy in the conversations which I have had with him. Let me assure you, at the outset, Mr. President, that our policy on nuclear research and development has not changed since I had the opportunity of discussing it with you in May 1961. I fully understand the dangers involved in the proliferation of nuclear weapons, and I sympathize with your efforts to avoid such a development. I fear that in the absence of an agreement between the Great Powers on general disarmament, there is little doubt that these weapons will, sooner or later, find their way into the arsenals of China and then of various European states and India. In this letter, however, I propose to deal not with the general international aspect on which you express your views so clearly in your letter—but with Israel’s own position and attitude on this question.
In our conversation in 1961, I explained to you that we were establishing a nuclear training and research reactor in Dimona with French assistance. This assistance has been given on condition that the reactor will be devoted exclusively to peaceful purposes. I regard this condition as absolutely binding, both on general grounds of good faith and because France has extended military assistance of unique value to Israel in her struggle for self-defence, from the Arab invasion of 1948 down to the present day.
In the same sense I informed you in 1961 that we are developing this reactor because we believe, on the strength of expert scientific advice, that within a decade or so the use of nuclear power will be economically viable and of great significance for our country’s development. I went on to add that we should have to follow developments in the Middle East. This is still our position today.
Between us and France there exists a bilateral arrangement concerning the Dimona reactor similar to that which we have with the United States in the reactor at Nachal Sureiq. While we do not envisage a system of formal United States control at the Dimona reactor which the United States has not helped to establish or construct, as in the case of the reactor at Nachal Sureiq, we do agree to further annual visits to Dimona by your representatives, such as have already taken place.
The “start-up” time of the Dimona reactor will not come until the end of this year or early in 1964. At that time, the French companies will hand the reactor over to us. I believe that this will be the most suitable time for your representatives to visit the reactor. At that stage they will be able to see it in an initial stage of operation, whereas now nothing is going on there except building construction.
I hope, Mr. President, that this proposal meets the concern expressed in your letter of May 19.
In 1961, you suggested the possibility that a visit be carried out by a scientist from a “neutral” country. This idea is acceptable to us, but a visit by an American expert would be equally acceptable from our point of view.
I appreciate what you say in your letters, Mr. President, about the commitment of the United States to Israel’s security. While I understand your concern with the prospect of a proliferation of nuclear weapons, we in Israel cannot be blind to the more actual danger now confronting us. I refer to the danger arising from destructive “conventional” weapons in the hands of neighboring governments which openly proclaim their intention to attempt the annihilation of Israel. This is our people’s major anxiety. It is a well-founded anxiety, and I have nothing at this stage to add to my letter of May 12 which is now, as I understand, receiving your active consideration.
Kennedy was far from satisfied with Ben-Gurion’s reply, particularily his attempt to stall any inspection in Dimona. In secret private conversations with the prime minister and in the following letter, Kennedy pressured Ben-Gurion for earlier and more frequent inspections of the nuclear site.
16 june 1963
Dear Mr. Prime Minister:
I thank you for your letter of May 27 concerning American visits to Israel’s nuclear facility at Dimona. I know your words reflect your most intense personal consideration of a problem that is not easy for you or for your Government, as it is not for mine.
I welcome your strong reaffirmation that the Dimona will be devoted exclusively to peaceful purposes. I also welcome your reaffirmation of Israel’s willingness to permit periodic visits to Dimona.
Because of the crucial importance of this problem, however, I am sure you will agree that such visits should be of a nature and on a schedule which will more nearly be in accord with international standards, thereby resolving all doubts as to the peaceful intent of the Dimona project.
Therefore, I asked our scientists to review the alternative schedules of visits we and you have proposed. If Israel’s purposes are to be clear to the world beyond reasonable doubt, I believe that the schedule which would best serve our common purposes would be a visit early this summer, another visit in June 1964, and thereafter at intervals of six months. I am sure that such a schedule should not cause you any more difficulty than that which you have proposed. It would be essential, and I take it that your letter is in accord with this, that our scientists have access to all areas of the Dimona site and to any related part of the complex, such as fuel fabrication facilities or plutonium separation plant, and that sufficient time be allotted for a thorough examination.
Knowing that you fully appreciate the truly vital significance of this matter to the future well-being of Israel, to the United States, and internationally, I am sure our carefully considered request will again have your most sympathetic attention.
John F. Kennedy
On June 16, 1963, Ben-Gurion, who had been Israel’s leader since its inception in 1948, resigned from his office. Many believed his resignation was due in great measure to his dispute with Kennedy over Dimona. In a letter to Ben-Gurion’s successor, Levi Eshkol, Kennedy left no doubt as to what the U.S. response would be if « we were unable to obtain reliable information » about the intent of the Dimona project, a threat that according to one conspiracy theory lead to Israel’s role in Kennedy’s assassination.
July 4, 1963
Dear Mr. Prime Minister:
It gives me great personal pleasure to extend congratulations as you assume your responsibilities as Prime Minister of Israel. You have our friendship and best wishes in your new tasks. It is on one of these that I am writing you at this time.
You are aware, I am sure, of the exchanges which I had with Prime Minister Ben-Gurion concerning American visits to Israel’s nuclear facility at Dimona. Most recently, the Prime Minister wrote to me on May 27. His words reflected a most intense personal consideration of a problem that I know is not easy for your Government, as it is not for mine. We welcomed the former Prime Minister’s strong reaffirmation that Dimona will be devoted exclusively to peaceful purposes and the reaffirmation also of Israel’s willingness to permit periodic visits to Dimona.
I regret having to add to your burdens so soon after your assumption of office, but I feel the crucial importance of this problem necessitates my taking up with you at this early date certain further considerations, arising out of Mr. Ben-Gurion’s May 27 letter, as to the nature and scheduling of such visits.
I am sure you will agree that these visits should be as nearly as possible in accord with international standards, thereby resolving all doubts as to the peaceful intent of the Dimona project. As I wrote Mr Ben-Gurion, this government’s [USA] commitment to and support of Israel could be seriously jeopardized if it should be thought that we were unable to obtain reliable information on a subject as vital to peace as the question of Israel’s effort in the nuclear field.
Therefore, I asked our scientists to review the alternative schedules of visits we and you had proposed. If Israel’s purposes are to be clear beyond reasonable doubt, I believe that the schedule which would best serve our common purposes would be a visit early this summer, another visit in June 1964, and thereafter at intervals of six months. I am sure that such a schedule should not cause you any more difficulty than that which Mr. Ben-Gurion proposed in his May 27 letter. It would be essential, and I understand that Mr. Ben-Gurion’s letter was in accord with this, that our scientists have access to all areas of the Dimona site and to any related part of the complex, such as fuel fabrication facilities or plutonium separation plant, and that sufficient time be allotted for a thorough examination.
Knowing that you fully appreciate the truly vital significance of this matter to the future well-being of Israel, to the United States, and internationally, I am sure our carefully considered request will have your most sympathetic attention.
John F. Kennedy
New Book of Kennedy Letters Supports Thesis:
JFK Opposed Israel’s Nuclear Aspirations
“Threat” in president’s personal correspondence to Israeli leaders cited by respected author
By Richard V. London
Pro-Israel agitators are in a frenzy. A forth-coming book—the first ever collection of the late President John F. Kennedy’s correspondence—dares to suggest the theory that Israel’s intelligence service, the Mossad, played a part in JFK’s assassination “remains one of the most intriguing” of the many scenarios relating to that crime. The book cites AFP correspondent Michael Collins Piper’s out-of-print underground best-seller, Final Judgment, as the source of that allegation.
Entitled The Letters of John F. Kennedy —and scheduled for November release by Bloomsbury (a “mainstream” publishing house)—the new 352-page volume was edited by respected historian and television producer Martin W. Sandler. Sandler put together this work with the cooperation of the Kennedy Presidential Library at Harvard. But the tome is already under attack, even prior to publication.
Having obtained advance copies and discovering Sandler’s references to Piper’s thesis, influential pro-Israel propaganda voices—such as National Review (founded by ex-CIA operative William F. Buckley Jr.) and The Washington Free Beacon, edited by the son-in-law of neoconservative power broker William Kristol—promptly launched an Internet cannonade savaging Sandler and Piper.
Here’s what was considered so outrageous: In the final chapter of the book—after noting the multiple theories surrounding JFK’s death—Sandler reprinted nine pages of undeniably contentious correspondence between JFK and Israeli Prime Ministers David Ben-Gurion and Levi Eshkol, pointing out that JFK was convinced, in Sandler’s words, “that Israel’s pursuit of nuclear weapons capability was a serious threat to world peace.”
As if highlighting these little-known letters were not enough, Sandler inflamed Israel’s partisans by his candid introduction to that selection of letters, writing:
In March 1992, Rep. Paul Findley of Illinois wrote in The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, “It is interesting [to note] that in all the words written and uttered about the Kennedy assassination, Israel’s intelligence agency, the Mossad, has never been mentioned.” Two years later in his book
According to author Martin W. Sandler, Israel’s Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion (left) and Prime Minister John F. Kennedy were at bitter ends over Israel’s desire to develop a nuclear arsenal of mass destruction.
Final Judgment author Michael Collins [Piper] actually accused Israel of the crime. Of all the conspiracy theories, it remains one of the most intriguing.
What is indisputable is that although it was kept out of the eye of both the press and the public, a bitter dispute had developed between Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion, who believed that his nation’s survival depended on its attaining nuclear arms capability, and Kennedy, who was vehemently opposed to it.
Noting that Ben-Gurion quit his post in what Sandler notes “many believed . . . was due in great measure to his dispute with Kennedy,” Sandler reprints a July 4, 1963 letter to Levi Eshkol (Ben Gurion’s successor) in which JFK warns American “commitment to and support of Israel could be seriously jeopardized” if the United States felt it was being denied “reliable information on a subject as vital to peace as the question of Israel’s effort in the nuclear field.”
Sandler comments that this letter from JFK was a “threat” that “according to one conspiracy theory, led to Israel’s role in Kennedy’s assassination.”
The book closes several pages later, reprinting friendly letters to and from Kennedy’s widow in the wake of JFK’s murder, which—although Sandler doesn’t say this—resulted in a 180-degree turn about in U.S. policy toward Israel, giving Israel the opportunity to assemble its nuclear arsenal unimpeded.
What makes this volume so difficult for Israel’s advocates to contend with is that the editor cannot be dismissed as a “fringe writer” or “conspiracy theorist.”
A former professor of history at Smith College and at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, Sandler is author of some 80 non-fiction books on a wide variety of historical topics, a number of which were published by the Library of Congress as part of its “Young People’s American History Series.” A five-time winner of television’s Emmy award, Sandler was co-creator of the popular “This Was America” series (with William Shatner) and executive producer of such acclaimed documentaries as “American Image” (with Hal Holbrook), “American Treasure” (with Gene Kelly) and “The Entrepreneurs” (with Robert Mitchum).
Patriots: LBJ Killed JFK
• Ignored are Mossad’s numerous connections to assassination
by Michael Collins Piper
Patriots seem to have reached a “consensus” and decided Lyndon Johnson was the mastermind of the JFK assassination: LBJ launched the conspiracy and covered it up, utilizing renegades in the CIA, the military, the FBI and the Secret Service.
Under no circumstances—so patriots say—was there involvement by Israel’s intelligence service, the Mossad. The fact of numerous intimate Mossad connections (at multiple levels) to the conpiracy—not to mention JFK’s bitter dispute with Israel over its nuclear weapons program—is not considered relevant (or ever even referenced).
Now that my book, Final Judgment—documenting Israeli involvement (alongside the CIA) in the crime—is out of print, I am able to reflect candidly upon all of this, since no one can now accuse me of “hawking” my book.
A forceful proponent of the theme that “LBJ Killed JFK” is Alex Jones, who loudly touted Barr McClellan’s book Blood, Money and Power, which actually claims Lee Oswald was one of the gunmen who killed JFK.
(An AFP reader once called Jones’s radio program and mentioned Final Judgment, but Jones shouted him down, and Jones’s guest slammed the book as “anti-Semitic” and to be ignored.)
The response to Final Judgment has been complex and interesting.
A top Council on Foreign Relations figure—Christopher LeFleur (then U.S. ambassador to Malaysia)—tried to bribe booksellers in Malaysia not to distribute Final Judgment (or my other books), but they wouldn’t be compromised.
A lot of self-described “white nationalists” rejected the book since they didn’t like JFK’s racial policies. Others were angry a black nationalist wrote the introduction to the book.
Some critics of Israel wouldn’t endorse the book because they were afraid of being called “conspiracy theorists.”
A pro-Arab magazine (quite hostile to Israel) refused to accept advertising for Final Judgment because, the editor said, it might upset “those [expletive deleted] defamation groups,” referring to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), an intelligence and propaganda arm of the Mossad.
For its part, the ADL orchestrated energetic campaigns to suppress the book and deployed violent thugs from the Jewish Defense League to disrupt my speaking engagements and threaten my life.
The ADL actually said college students were not mature enough to hear my thesis, although, of course, the ADL did consider those kids old enough to join the U.S. military and die in wars to ensure Israel’s survival.
JFK “research” groups denounced me or refused to even mention Final Judgment, despite the fact it sold far better than some more widely publicized JFK assassination books.
Deb Conway from the assassination information group known as JFK Lancer vowed to join pro-Israel groups in picketing one of my lectures.
Probe’s Jim DiEugenio—who claims a “WASP plot” was behind JFK’s death—maliciously misrepresents Final Judgment (perhaps because his publishers were funded by a family who bankrolled Israel’s nuclear arsenal).
But I did get some good endorsements from historian Eustace Mullins, ex-Pentagon official Col. Donn de Grand Pre, author William Gill, researcher Brian Quig, Hollywood screenwriter Bill Norton and a powerful nod from former high-rankng State Department official Herbert L. Calhoun.
But don’t forget: “LBJ Killed JFK.”
Michael Collins Piper is a world-renowned author, journalist, lecturer and radio show host. He has spoken in Russia, Malaysia, Iran, Abu Dhabi, Japan, Canada and, of course, the United States. He is the author of Final Judgment, The New Jerusalem, The High Priests of War, Dirty Secrets, My First Days in the White House, The New Babylon, Share the Wealth: Huey Long vs Wall Street, The Judas Goats: The Enemy Within, Target: Traficant and The Golem: Israel’s Nuclear Hell Bomb.
Et qu’en est-il de LBJ, qui a certainement profité de la mort de JFK?
Le fait est que ce sont des Alex Jones qui font la promotion de la théorie du rôle central de LBJ dans la mort de JFK, alors que des chercheurs pionniers et courageux comme Michael Collins Piper se tiennent complètement en porte-à-faux avec cette théorie. Son livre False Flag: Template For Terror nie complètement la validité de la théorie du rôle central de LBJ, tout comme les supposées confessions de E. Howard Hunt sur son lit de mort. L’ADL n’attaque pas les conspirationnistes qui blâment LBJ, mais ceux qui comme Piper ont parlé publiquement du rôle central du Mossad dans cette affaire, ont été agressivement combattus par l’ADL de même que par les groupes de chercheurs du complot contre JFK. Même blâmer un vague « Deep State » (toujours en activité) serait plus juste que de blâmer un président mort et enterré. Si LBJ n’était qu’un pion d’Israël, comment expliquer ceci : pourquoi était-il aussi ambivalent par rapport à la guerre de six jours, refusant de l’apuyer complètement ? Pourquoi n’a-t-il pas fait couler le USS Liberty, pourquoi n’a-t-il pas fait finir le travail ? Pourquoi a-t-il fait cesser l’attaque contre le Liberty et décidé de ne pas envoyer de bombe sur le Caire ? Ce n’est pas à cela qu’on peut d’attendre d’un simple pantin d’Israël. S’il n’était rien de plus qu’un pion d’Israel, il n’aurait pas été nécessaire d’attaquer le USS Liberty, il aurait simplement suffi à Israel d’ordonner à son pion LBJ de partir en guerre. Notez que ce sont encore des Alex Jones qui font la promotion de la responsabilité centrale de LBJ dans l’affaire du Liberty ! Alex Jones nie la responsabilité d’Israël dans l’affaire JFK et l’affaire du Liberty, certes, mais pour le reste même certains auteurs qui blâment Israël trouvent le moyen de faire comme lui en concentrant le blâme ultimement, et par dessus tout, sur les épaules de LBJ. LBJ est présenté par certains comme l’Alpha et l’Oméga du sionisme en Amérique.
Dans sa conférence au Musée John F. Kennedy (en 2013), M. Sandler, responsable des correspondances de JFK, avait sûrement en tête Piper lorsqu’il parlait de publications sérieuses sur la connexion israélienne : son recueil réfère en toute lettre au livre de Michael Collins Piper, soulignant que sa thèse est l’une des plus intrigantes. Une piste de recherche identifiée par Piper mérite plus d’attention : le rôle de l’agent sioniste officiel à la CIA, James J. Angleton. Pourquoi tant d’insistance sur LBJ et si peu sur Angleton chez les chercheurs de l’affaire JFK ? Peut-être est-ce impopulaire de le blâmer (il est à noter qu’un nombre remarquable d’amateurs intéressés par le sujet partagent avec Angleton la croyance au « grand complot communiste »). Piper souligne qu’Angleton a conçu la propagande mensongère blâmant Castro et l’URSS pour la mort de JFK, afin d’accroître les tensions de la guerre froide.
Notons également que les conclusions de Jim Fetzer (ancien Marine rompu aux techniques de sciences cognitives) tendent à minimiser le rôle d’Angleton, rôle pourtant archi important au vu des découvertes de Piper. Selon Fetzer, Jackie est la vraie coupable. Il entre en conflit avec les thèses défendues par Piper, attaquant un à un les piliers sur lesquels s’appuie son travail. Comme Alex Jones, Fetzer donne une fausse représentation des travaux de Piper en prétendant que celui-ci focalise sur la « probable implication » du Mossad. D’autres diluent comme lui la thèse de la responsabilité centrale israélienne en identifiant trois acteurs distincts : Israël, LBJ et la CIA. C’est donner à LBJ bien trop d’importance, et c’est tenter de dissocier d’Israël les éléments de la CIA impliqués. Piper ne dit pas que le Mossad est le seul coupable, mais que la sphère d’influence du Mossad s’étend jusque sur la CIA, le gouvernement, la mafia, les anticastristes cubains (Castro s’est fait un ennemi de la mafia Lansky qui a dû déménager son centre d’activités à Vegas). Le Mossad est vu comme un chaînon manquant occulté et élément conducteur unissant entre eux tous les acteurs du complot. LBJ n’unit pas à lui seul tous les acteurs ci-nommés. Oliver Stone n’a pas eu de problème à blâmer les militaires et LBJ. Peut-être est-ce un compromis acceptable pour Israël que de blâmer LBJ pour JFK et le Liberty. Sinon, Haaretz n’irait pas jusqu’à faire la réclame pour le livre de Phillip Nelson qui blâme LBJ pour le Liberty. Ce même auteur plébicisé par Haaretz a aussi écrit un livre intitulé LBJ : le cerveau de l’assassinat de JFK…
*LBJ: The Mastermind of JFK’s Assassination by Phillip F. Nelson La thèse de ce livre est extrêmement douteuse et vient du même auteur qui tentait récemment (voir REF. plus bas) de blâmer LBJ pour l’attaque du USS Liberty, pour disculper Israel et en faire un simple pion (« Oui, on a tiré sur le Liberty mais c’était pour obéir aux ordre du Président LBJ! »). C’est exactement le discours des désinformateurs qui tentent de cacher le rôle d’Israël en partageant la responsabilité de l’assassinat de JFK entre Israel, la CIA, la mafia et LBJ. Ceux qui propagent cette désinfo sont aussi ceux qui attaquaient Piper quand il était encore en vie. Alex Jones n’est que le plus célèbre d’entre eux.
REF: HAARETZ: ‘But Sir, It’s an American Ship’ ‘Never Mind, Hit Her! When Israel Attacked USS Liberty « The authors’ bottom line is that then-U.S. President Lyndon B. Johnson was behind the attack, in an attempt to blame then-Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser – an excuse that would then enable the United States to join the Six-Day War. »
COMMENT BY MARK GLENN: The truly nauseating thing about this whole issue is that the men of the LIBERTY who cooperated in writing this book have given their imprimatur on something which in the end is going to result in their murderers getting off scott-free. Not coincidentally, the author of this book also penned a work* whereby the assassination of JFK–proven slam dunk to have been an Israeli operation from top to bottom by the irreplaceable Michael Collins Piper in his book Final Judgment–was actually the handiwork of–drum role please–the same Lyndon Baines Johnson who is now being blamed for the attack on the LIBERTY.
Plus de détails:
La piste israélienne n’est plus ignorée dans les ouvrages de référence sur JFK, panique des néocons dans les médias (National Review, Washington Free Beacon) – Extrait de la fin du livre « The Letters of John F. Kennedy »