Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Conspiracy Nation Vol. 01 Num. 19
Conspiracy Nation -- Vol. 1 Num. 19
======================================
("Quid coniuratio est?")
-----------------------------------------------------------------
RESOLVED: President Kennedy was killed as the result of a
conspiracy.
[Continuation of my transcription of a radio debate which took
place in the Fall of 1993 between Peter Dale Scott and Gerald
Posner. Today, Mr. Scott and Mr. Posner exchange questions.]
MODERATOR: You are listening to "The Assassination of John F.
Kennedy, A Formal Debate," with Gerald Posner and Peter Dale
Scott.
Each of you will now ask alternating questions of the other
participant. Mr. Scott, you have one minute to ask a question.
PETER DALE SCOTT: Mr. Posner has dug out of Warren Commission
archives an Oswald chronology that is in part faked, and at times
faked by Oswald himself. In August, 1963, there was a raid on an
arms cache on Lake Pontchartrain. Now Mr. Posner says that news
stories talked about an armed training camp, but it's important
that this was never mentioned in the news stories. And *yet*,
Oswald went to a man called Carlos Bringuier of the DRE
[Directorio Revolucionario Estudiantil(?)] -- it had been a DRE
training camp whose arms cache was raided. But there was nothing
about this in the press. And Oswald asked... offered to be a
trainer. Bringuier said, "He [Oswald] must have been an agent,
because no one else knew." And not only that, Oswald asked about
organized crime, about La Cosa Nostra. It took us 12 years for
the rest of us to find that they were involved.
How did Oswald know these things?
MODERATOR: Mr. Posner, you have 2 minutes to respond.
GERALD POSNER: I'm surprised at that, Mr. Scott. Because, in
fact, there *had* been extensive newspaper coverage (as you know)
of the raid across the river. [Mr. Scott says something, off
microphone. Inaudible.] Absolutely. There had been extensive
coverage in the *Times-Picayune*.
*And*... very important point: Although I'm not here to defend
Carlos Bringuier, one of the things that you *do* have in your
book (as I'm sure you have issues with statements that I've
made)... In your book you have him [Bringuier] as a member of the
DRE, this anti-Castro group. I just spoke to Bringuier again the
other night on this very issue. It's absolutely not true that he
was a member of the DRE. And he takes great offense at that,
because he was not. It's stated in the book a number of times
that he is. But that is not the organization that he was
associated with.
And Oswald, at the time that he went in to see Carlos Bringuier,
in August of '63, in Dallas, was playing what I call, "the poor
man's intelligence agent." What does Marina tell us? (Although I
know you don't like to *hear* Marina, because you say she's a
liar.) She tells us, in fact, that even at the time he was in the
Soviet Union he said, "I'd love the life of a spy." The Russians,
the White Russians [anti-communist] who were near him in Dallas,
remember a book that said, "How To Be a Spy." He was, as Warren
DeBrueys tells me (one of the FBI agents in New Orleans),
somebody he had seen many times, who had this tendency to want to
be, as he said, "a poor man's intelligence..." He thought he was
intervening in actually being able to get inside his great foes
at this time, the anti-Castro Cubans. His love of Castro was
running high. He was committed to the cause. And by getting
inside Bringuier's group he would enhance his credentials when
eventually he wanted to go to Cuba. By August of '63, Oswald was
committed to going to Cuba because it had been, for him, the "new
nirvana." The Soviet Union was [his dream] when he was 19. And he
left in '59 to find happiness. And the Russians told him,
"Leave," before he killed himself -- something else, of course, I
didn't see in the book [Scott's book] -- but when he tried to
slash his wrists.
He now is ready to go to Cuba to find happiness. But the
difference is that he *doesn't*. He's not able to get into
Bringuier's group; he's arrested a few days later. *It's all on
the record*. And I must tell you that it's very clearly on the
record. So that I find very little question about what happened
in the summer of '63.
MODERATOR: Mr. Posner, *you* now have one minute to ask Mr. Scott
a question.
POSNER: The... Uh, in Mr. Scott's book, it seems to me that the
"deep politics" that he talks about, what in essence is (and
he'll correct me if I'm using not the right terminology)... but
what I view as almost the second government. This secret
government that essentially runs, with a combination of
government officials and intelligence organizations and drug
traffickers and a host of others, um, is almost so powerful that
it's able to do things like the Kennedy assassination and
maintain it as a massive cover-up -- no matter how many people
are involved.
Uh, you say it's not conspiratorially minded, you aren't, when
you approach these subjects. But what I wonder is, is there *any*
assassination, or attempted assassination, that you think was
really done by a lone assassin, in recent American history? Uh,
Martin Luther King, Bobby Kennedy, George Wallace, Huey Long...
Would those all be conspiracies, in your view, or were any of
those lone assassins?
MODERATOR: Mr. Scott, you have 2 minutes to respond.
SCOTT: Well very quickly, let me say that I haven't studied those
other assassinations as much as this one. My mind is *open* to
it, on the basis of what I *have* learned. But I really haven't
any idea.
Uh, I'd like to clarify... because you didn't quite get what I
meant by "deep politics." I actually had a section in which I
said, "No. It is *not* the same as 'invisible government' or
'secret team.'" It is the constant, everyday interaction between
the constitutionally elected government and forces of violence,
forces of crime, which appear to be the enemies of that
government. But in fact, on a workaday basis -- whether it's City
Hall in a city, or the CIA and the Mafia plotting against Castro
-- are, in fact, part of the governance of this society.
And I *agree* that an external conspiracy, whether it was Cubans
or Nazis or even organized crime itself, could *never* have
killed the President and gotten away with it.
But we have ongoing, working relationships between, for example,
organized crime and the police in Chicago. Which meant in a 30-
year period there was not a single organized crime murder [that]
was solved in that city. And I'm saying that this sort of thing,
which people know about and really accept, locally, should be
seen as part of the way in which our country works: that our
country uses violence, and the forces in power use violence. And
although it is a very rare event for people inside the
bureaucracy to use violence against their own president, that is
what I *do* believe happened in 1963. And the reason that it
was -- they got away with it -- is that they have shared so many
other crimes that they got away, with part of the ongoing system.
MODERATOR: Mr. Scott, I have to caution you to try and use your
time better. But, you have one minute to ask Mr. Posner a
question.
(to be continued)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I encourage distribution of "Conspiracy Nation."
-----------------------------------------------------------------
If you would like "Conspiracy Nation" sent to your e-mail
address, send a message in the form "subscribe my-email@address"
to bigxc@prairienet.org -- To cancel, send a message in the form
"cancel my-email@address." && Articles sent in are considered.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Aperi os tuum muto, et causis omnium filiorum qui pertranseunt.
Aperi os tuum, decerne quod justum est, et judica inopem et
pauperem. -- Liber Proverbiorum XXXI: 8-9
