Does it really matter who killed JFK?
It seems to me that the really important thing is that the Kremlin and its KGB (today's SVR and FSB) have "made hay" from the anomaly-replete assassination literally since Day One, when some Kremlin functionaries told Morris Childs, one of the FBI's SOLO brothers who couriered $28 million from the Kremlin to the CPUSA over twenty years and who just happened to be at the Kremlin around midnight on 11/22/63, that the KGB had nothing to do with former Marine sharpshooter and U-2 radar operator Lee Harvey Oswald during the two-and-a-half years he lived in the USSR.
Three-and-a-half years later, the KGB planted an anti-CIA/anti-Clay Shaw article in a Communist-owned Italian newspaper three days after over-ambitious, scandal-plagued, and revengeful New Orleans D.A. Jim Garrison had arrested the New Orleans businessman on suspicion of having masterminded a Loeb-and-Leopold-like homosexual thrill-kill assassination. The article was picked up by a far-left French newspaper, translated into English and given to Garrison by Bertrand Russell’s far-left secretary, Ralph Schoenman, and motivated Garrison to change his theory against Shaw to "He organized it for the CIA!"
Factoid:
In his 1989 book, "On the Trail of the Assassins" — which Oliver Stone integrated into his self-described mythological (“to counter the myth of the Warren Report”) film, “JFK,” Garrison lied when he said he didn't read the article until after the 1969 trial (which the jury decided against him in less than an hour). We know that he lied, though, because his assistant, Life magazine’s Richard Billings, wrote in his diary in mid-March 1967 that Garrison had received said article and was beginning to believe the CIA was behind the assassination.
Topic: Does it really matter who killed JFK? (Read 122 times)