– attributed to short story writer Delmore Schwartz (1913-1966)
I believe President John Kennedy’s assassination was the product of a well-planned conspiracy, probably masterminded by organized crime figures, in which officially determined assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, a supposed obsessed Communist madman,
[1] was an unwitting accomplice.
I believe Senator Robert Kennedy’s assassination was the product of a well-planned conspiracy, probably masterminded by organized crime figures, in which convicted assassin, Sirhan Sirhan, a supposed obsessed madman,
[2] was an unwitting accomplice.
I believe Princess Diana was murdered by an arm of the British Intelligence Services with not less than the knowledge and tacit approval of (and perhaps with orders from) Queen Elizabeth II and her husband, Prince Phillip.
I believe Meriwether Lewis (he of the Lewis and Clark Expedition and the Corps of Discovery) did not die by suicide
[3], but was assassinated by agents of the infamous Burr-Wilkinson conspiracy.
I believe notorious outlaw Jesse James was not assassinated by Bob and Charlie Ford, but rather a dead body was substituted and Jesse James happily lived out his life under an assumed name.
I believe President Franklin Roosevelt had advance knowledge the Japanese would launch an attack on the United States at Pearl Harbor and let the attack proceed.
I believe the “attack” on U.S. Navy vessels in the Gulf of Tonkin, which attack was President Lyndon Johnson’s justification for demand for the Congressional Resolution
[4] that was used to authorize the escalation and prosecution of the Viet Nam War, was a sham.
I believe the attempted assassination of President-elect Franklin Roosevelt, in which Anton Cermak, the reform Mayor of Chicago, died, was the result of a conspiracy, masterminded by organized crime, in which Giuseppe Zangara, the convicted assassin,
[5] was an unwitting or compelled accomplice. And Cermak was the true target.
But of all conspiracies, I believe it has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the known conspiracy of John Wilkes Booth, who assassinated Abraham Lincoln, was only the tactical conspiracy, subordinate to a much more sensational strategic conspiracy.
THE LINCOLN ASSASSINATION
Booth’s convicted co-conspirators, George Atzerodt, Lewis Powell aka Lewis Payne, David Herold, Mary Surratt and others, did not conceive the assassination plot but were nothing more than committed Confederates, taking orders from Captain John Wilkes Booth, CSA,
[6] who was receiving his orders from a higher level of conspiracy, consisting of Confederate President Jefferson C. Davis, Confederate Secretary of State Judah P. Benjamin and Confederate General Robert E. Lee, with input and transmission through and assistance from Confederate Colonel John Singleton Mosby, among others.
[7]
In short, Booth was no madman; he was a Confederate intelligence agent and a Confederate patriot. The murder he committed and the others he ordered – of Vice President Andrew Johnson by Atzerodt, of Secretary of State William Seward by Powell - and, possibly, of Secretary of War William Stanton by another conspirator, Michael O’Laughlin
[8] – were all desperate acts of war.
There are three books in particular that I find carry the burden of proof of this conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt:
Come Retribution: The Confederate Secret Service and the Assassination of Lincoln, by William A. Tidwell, James O. Hall and David Winfred Gaddy (U. Miss. Press, 1988)
April, ’65: Confederate Covert Action in the American Civil War, by William A. Tidwell (Kent State U. Press, 1995)
[9]
Blood on the Moon: The Assassination of Abraham Lincoln, by Edward Steers, Jr. (U. Ky. Press, 2005)
It is noteworthy that all three books were published by academic presses, which are known for their scrupulous vetting for solid research and scholarly value. Further contributing to the credibility of these works is that William Tidwell is a retired U.S. Army Brigadier General, whose military career was spent in intelligence work.
[10] (As shown in his footnotes and bibliography Steers relied heavily on Come Retribution as a point of departure for his own research.)
The central point of all three books is, as stated, that the Lincoln assassination grew out of an earlier failed attempt by Booth and his crew to kidnap President Lincoln and then trade their valuable hostage for the release of thousands of Confederate prisoners of war being held in the North. When that plot failed, the decision was made to “decapitate” the Union government by removing its top three (or maybe four, depending on the truth about an O’Laughlin attempt on Stanton) Constitutional Officers, thereby paralyzing the Union war effort and giving the Confederate forces still in the field time to reorganize, restrengthen, resupply and return to the fray with a strategy of unifying the separated elements and then defeating the principal Union armies in detail. Furthermore, perhaps the removal of those staunch Unionists might result in their replacement in the Federal Government by others more willing to consider letting the Confederacy separate in peace.
Skeptics of this concept point to the fact that Lee had already surrendered on April 9, so that when the assassination took place on April 14 the War was already over. Tidwell, et al, make the salient point that several other Confederate Armies, such as Joe Johnston’s in North Carolina, Richard Taylor’s in Alabama, Kirby Smith’s in Texas and others were still in the field and still giving battle. Moreover, many individual soldiers and units (including most notably, Mosby’s Rangers) had so far refrained from taking the oath of allegiance to lay down arms and conduct themselves henceforth as non-combatants. As they had not personally surrendered, for many of these soldiers the War was not over.
[11]
Beyond that, as of the April 14 Lincoln assassination, President Davis and the Confederate cabinet were still on the run from Richmond, reportedly heading South to the protection of Joe Johnston’s command. In fact, Davis was not captured until May 10, 1865. Benjamin, his cabinet co-conspirator, was never captured. Benjamin fled to England and with his prior training as a lawyer (he had also served as Attorney General of the Confederacy as well as Secretary of State and Secretary of War) became a renowned jurist and Queen’s Counsel, writing two definitive commercial law books.
[12]
The hard facts mustered in these three books weaves such a web of circumstantial evidence it validates the conclusion the assassination was the intended product of a conspiracy conceived, planned, funded, managed and led by Confederate leaders.
Not the least of these facts is that in 1864 a Union cavalry raid, led by Colonel Ulrich Dahlgren, had taken place. The destination of the raid was Richmond and the ostensible target was Libby Prison where the raiding party was to free the Prison’s substantial numbers of Union prisoners of war, who were reported (accurately) to be suffering severe privations and starvation. However, when the Confederates interdicted the raid, killing Dahlgren and others, orders were reportedly found in his effects that indicated another target, perhaps the primary target of the raid, was the assassination of the Confederate leaders. The existence of these orders were thus appreciated by the Confederates as justification for “taking off the gloves” and prosecuting the war by any means necessary and available, so that the assassination of Lincoln and his key subordinates would be nothing more than appropriate retribution.
[13] (Hence, the title of the first Tidwell book. In fact, Tidwell and his co-authors believe the book title was the code name for the Confederate secret operation to get Lincoln, whether by kidnap or murder.
[14])
It is important to note, however, that controversy still exists as to whether or not the Dahlgren orders were themselves fabricated by the Confederates as a public relations effort to show the immorality of the Union government.
[15] My belief is that the orders were indeed fabricated, BUT I intuit (with no evidence to point to) that such fabrication was engineered by Judah Benjamin without the knowledge of Davis or Lee, both as a public relations coup and as the impetus that Benjamin sought in order to convince Davis and Lee that going after the Lincoln government directly was justifiable and necessary.
Davis and Lee were both West Point graduates. Pick up any biography of either of them (particularly of Lee
[16]) and you’ll find it crystal clear that both took West Point’s motto – Duty, Honor, Country – as seriously as any of their Victorian chivalrous contemporaries. Such skullduggery as assassination by spies would be anathema unless justified by extraordinary circumstances perpetrated by the evil of those to be liquidated.
Benjamin was encumbered by no such training or scruples. Rather, he had grown up in a modest Jewish family and had worked his way into the upper levels of Southern Society through business acumen, legal skills and guile, despite the widespread latent, and sometimes blatant, anti-Semitism prevalent in the 19th century Western World.
[17]
Benjamin’s goal was pure and simple – to win.
However, for me the clincher is that the assassination fits the three essential elements that have always incriminated suspects – Opportunity, Means and Motive.
As one of the premier stars of American theater, John Wilkes Booth, a committed and hotly ardent pro-slavery Confederate from the border State of Maryland, was free to move about the country, and indeed across the border to Canada and back
[18]. Montreal, in particular, was a known and proven center of Confederate secret operations and foreign communication. According to Tidwell, it was in Canada that Booth received the cash to fund the secret operations against Lincoln
[19].
Booth’s devotion to the Southern cause thus presented the Opportunity. He built an organization, in part with the help of members of Mosby Rangers
[20] who were infiltrated into Washington from nearby Northern Virginia. Voila, the Means!
Most importantly, though, the Dahlgren orders were the catalytic capstone on the continuing motive of the Civil War itself. It is further of no small moment that it was well known in the South that many Northerners were declaring that the Southern leaders were a bunch of traitors and were to be summarily hanged as such once the War was brought to its just and inevitable conclusion
[21]. Thus it seems doubtless that Davis, Benjamin, Lee and Mosby could quite reasonably have believed that they were fighting for their lives as well as the Cause. That it was “them or us;” that “All’s fair in love and war.”
One last little tidbit about the Lincoln Assassination.
When Booth leapt from the stage at Ford’s Theater, he caught his stirrup on the bunting decorating the Presidential Box and so landed awkwardly breaking his left ankle. After escaping Washington he headed into Charles County, Maryland and stopped at the home of Dr. Samuel Mudd, who set Booth’s broker leg and kept him and his co-conspirator, David Herold, hidden at his farm for several days thereafter. Mudd was tried and convicted with the captured Lincoln conspirators, but received a jail sentence, rather than the death penalty. His descendants vigorously maintained he was innocent to such a degree that both President Jimmy Carter and President Ronald Reagan issued sympathetic statements but would not grant the requested posthumous pardon, ostensibly for reasons of legality. Both Presidents appear duped into their supportive statements in any event.
A fourth trenchant book on the Lincoln murder, Manhunt: The 12-Day Chase for Lincoln’s Killer by James Swanson
[22] establishes that Mudd was at least guilty of knowingly harboring a fugitive, but more damning had been an accessory in the planning for the kidnapping of Lincoln.
As to Carter and Reagan, I wonder whether their sympathetic responses had anything to do with the fact that influential Tv Anchorman, Roger Mudd, a relative, but not direct descendant of Dr. Mudd, whose family relationship was well known and trumpeted by the direct descendants seeking the pardon. The cost of a sympathetic statement would be minimal, but an outright rejection or even a refusal to respond just might have provoked Mudd, whose view of both Presidents was decidedly skeptical.
Now, let us take a moment and consider the same elements of Opportunity, Means and Motive, for the other alleged conspiracies I enumerated at the start of this paper:
PRESIDENT KENNEDY’S ASSASSINATION
There are many theories on the Kennedy assassination, surely the most worked-over event for modern conspiracy theorists. These theories include the possibility that the Kennedy assassination was engineered by the Soviets, Fidel Castro, the anti-Castro Cubans, J. Edgar Hoover, the CIA, rogue elements of the CIA, Lyndon Johnson, Jacqueline Kennedy (yup, for JFK’s numerous marital infidelities) and/or Organized Crime.
[23]
Nevertheless, in his penultimate chillingly cold-hearted analysis of the JFK assassination, Anthony Summers
[24] lays out what seems to be the most compelling case - i.e. the most compelling motive - for the murder, which was this:
Robert Kennedy’s Justice Department was slowly but surely tightening the noose on the Mid-States Pension Fund, which handled the labor union money for Jimmy Hoffa’s Teamsters, and – this is critical – provided much of the funding for the Mob’s operations, particularly gambling. In 1963 the Mob was still reeling from the loss of its Cuban casinos and had suffered a number of other setbacks, including most notably the revelations of the Mafia turncoat, Joseph Valachi, whose disclosures and testimony were causing untold headaches – and arrests - for the criminals. But the ultimate Mafia nightmare, was a shutdown or government takeover of the Teamster’s Union and its Pension Fund, a distinct possibility under the 1959 Landrum Griffin Act (aka the Landrum Griffin Reporting & Disclosure Act).
[25] John Kennedy, then a Senator, had played a key role in passage of the final bill, which was an amalgamation of two bills, one of which was sponsored by Kennedy and Senator Sam Ervin (later of Watergate fame).
[26]. (Moreover, JFK’s brother, Robert F. Kennedy, was Chief Counsel to the McClellan Committee, and it was RFK’s questioning of Teamster Boss Jimmy Hoffa that made headlines and helped to swing public opinion and Senatorial votes in support of the Act.
[27])
A takeover of the Fund would be tantamount to the government shutting down the Mob’s bank. And that would be too much to bear, THAT would be adequate motive, in my mind for such an audacious act as the killing of the President.
There are many other facts of circumstantial evidence, from Oswald’s links to the Mafia in New Orleans where Boss Carlos Marcello was headquartered,
[28] to the known Mafia connections to Jack Ruby,
[29] who silenced Oswald forever by shooting him in the basement of Dallas Police Headquarters just three days after JFK was gunned down. The myriad of those facts seem to tie in to the notion of the Mob being the fount and executor of the conspiracy. But the clincher is, again, motive.
And, consider the other theories.
What would the Soviets have to gain? Nothing would seem to be more dangerous for them than for such an effort to have been exposed. The Soviets had nothing to gain from World War III, whether nuclear or not.
Similarly for Castro, such an act would seem to have guaranteed the advent of the American invasion he so feared. (Consider how creating disinformation pointing to Castro as the culprit would be a bonus for the Mob to recover their lost casinos.) Hence, directing the patsy Oswald to publicize himself as a committed Communist acting on behalf of the mythical Fair Play for Cuba Committee would be just one piece of that misdirection.
For the anti-Castro Cubans, the risk of discovery would seem surely to mean forfeiture of any near-term hope of assistance in overthrowing Castro and may well have led to widespread deportation and who knows what else that would have destroyed the budding community the expatriate Cubans were building in South Florida. [Nevertheless, the real possibility that some individual anti-Castro Cubans may have been involved with the Mob’s assassination efforts is not to be discounted. If so, their motive was to see the resumption of U.S. based operations against Castro and his regime, which had been shut down by the Kennedy Administration after the Cuban Missile Crisis.
[30] (Prior to the crisis the U.S. efforts, overseen by Robert Kennedy, had been carried out under the code name Operation Mongoose
[31].) The shutdown was part of the secret deal made by President Kennedy with Soviet Premier Khrushchev to obtain removal of the Soviet missiles from Cuba to terminate the Cuban Missile Crisis.
[32] It is, in fact, wholly believable that the Mafia may well have played on the notion of revenge and resurgence to obtain “free-lance” Cuban exiles to handle some of the work. Plus the revelations that the CIA had enlisted Mafia figures to aid in trying to assassinate Castro proves the link for the Mafia to the CIA-funded Cuban exiles of the Bay of Pigs.]
Supposedly, J. Edgar Hoover’s motive was a rumor that the Kennedys were finally going to fire him
[33]. But Hoover’s dossier on all three surviving Kennedy brothers was overflowing with compromising materials. Why engage in a crime when Hoover could manipulate them far more effectively, as indeed he had in the past, by blackmail?
[34]
The CIA? By the time of the assassination, Alan Dulles and Richard Bissell, the two architects of the Bay of Pigs
[35], which was supposedly the principal cause celebre of CIA anger, were out of the Agency, and Kennedy’s man, John McCone was running the show.
[36]
Rogue elements of the CIA? Again, the Agency was under McCone’s control and it is questionable (though not inconceivable) that such a complex and perilous operation could have been run within the Agency. Moreover, whatever may be said about the foibles of the CIA, then and now, its staff consists primarily if not entirely of patriots and it seems unlikely that somebody clued in, intentionally or inadvertently, would not have blown the whistle. That is not to say, however, that the Mob’s established links to a few Agency individuals might not have been exploited along with some anti-Castro Cubans, but that’s not the same as masterminding, organizing and executing the deed.
Lyndon Johnson? Well, he did stand to gain by becoming the President. He did have many gripes with his treatment by the Kennedys. His political and personal history has no shortage of circumstances in which it seems he flouted the law.
[37] But the effort that would seem necessary to planning, organizing, monitoring and implementing the assassination would seem to be impossible to accomplish while serving as the Vice President of the United States. And what would the Presidency be worth if such treachery were discovered?
It is worth noting however, that Johnson may well have manipulated the Warren Commission and the FBI in the investigation of the murder and wanted a report that pinned the blame on lone gunman Oswald,
[38] but because of fears that Oswald’s Soviet connections might otherwise lead to a dangerous increase in tensions with the Soviet Union.
[39]
Johnson’s involvement is just not plausible, even if your opinion of Lyndon Johnson is that abysmally low.
Jacqueline Kennedy? If the motive was there, why now and not years ago? If anyone had much to lose by the assassination, it was she. I find it difficult to even take this accusation seriously.
THE ROBERT KENNEDY ASSASSINATION
OK, let’s move on to Senator Robert Kennedy’s assassination.
Quite simply, the motive remained the same as for JFK’s killing and the players largely the same. RFK was running for President in 1968 and seemed to have enough momentum that his nomination and election was looking more and more possible. Kennedy was known to believe that the Mafia may well have played a role in his brother’s death
[40]. With the Kennedy motto reputedly “Don’t get mad, get even”
[41] what better way for Robert Kennedy to recoup than from the Oval Office? What greater nightmare for the Mafia Dons than a Kennedy bent on revenge with the entire power of the federal government at his fingertips?
Sirhan Sirhan, another “mad assassin” who conveniently left a “diary” to document his madness,
[42] may well have fired his weapon while in a controlled hypnotic trance
[43] and it is possible, if not likely, that another shooter was present who may well have fired the fatal shot.
[44] Regardless, the key is the organized crime motive.
Conversely, Sirhan Sirhan’s supposed motive of Kennedy’s support for Israel
[45] makes no sense. EVERY candidate for President, Republican and Democrat, trumpeted support for Israel. Robert Kennedy’s pronouncements were no more intense than that of any other candidate. For RFK the Middle East was a sideshow to his main campaign themes of ending the Viet Nam war, promoting Civil Rights and eradicating poverty.
[46]
THE DEATH OF PRINCESS DIANA
So let’s take a look at more recent history and the rather bizarre death by out-of- control automobile of Princess Diana, divorced wife of Prince Charles of Great Britain. The facts surrounding the “accident” that resulted in the death of the British Princess in Paris remain somewhat obscure, with various versions argued by experts and neophytes. In any event the established facts seem to provide motive galore.
The key facts are these. After a troubled marriage the heir apparent to the British throne, Prince Charles, was divorced from Diana Spencer, his wife and the mother of his two sons. Despite the divorce, Diana remained a darling of the media often in the public eye. Many in the public felt she had been the innocent in the divorce and that the aloof Charles and his parents, Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip, the Royals, had treated her unfairly.
[47] After an interval of several years, Diana became romantically involved with Dodi Fayed, Egyptian heir of one of the wealthiest men in the world. His Father had purchased and owned, among many other companies and investments, the landmark British retailer, Harrods. Egypt had been a vassal state under the control of Great Britain as recently as a mere four years before the birth of Queen Elizabeth II and did not achieve full sovereignty free of British control until after World War II.
After Diana’s death two critical facts became public that were sure to have upset the Royal family and almost surely known to them before her death. First, Diana was engaged to marry Dodi Fayed.
[48] Second, the icing on the motivation cake, she was several months pregnant with his child.
[49] It is no great stretch of imagination to think the Queen and Prince would be appalled at the notion their royal grandsons would be half-brothers to a child of a colored colonial Muslim subject from a Muslim country. If Diana’s whole romance and relationship were seen as one more maximally insolent slap in the face to the Royal family, how tough would it be for them to decide enough was enough? Would they not be thrilled if Britain’s covert services could find a way to end the whole shooting match – Diana, Dodi and their unborn bastard child? A properly staged auto accident might be just the ticket, especially if post-accident “medical care” was controlled.
MERIWETHER LEWIS: THE FABRICATED SUICIDE
After serving as Thomas Jefferson’s personal secretary and co-captaining the exploration of the Louisiana Purchase with William Clark, Lewis became the appointed Governor of the Missouri Territory, which encompassed what is now Missouri and Arkansas. In that position he recognized several threads (more like ropes) of the Burr-Wilkinson conspiracy to invade Spanish Territory and establish a separate nation, all of which was apparently tied to greed for lead mines in Missouri and silver mines in Mexico, as well as the aggrandizement of establishing a competing nation after Burr had narrowly lost the 1800 Presidential election to Jefferson.
With trunks of documents under his control, Meriwether Lewis, was shot to death at an Inn on the Natchez Trace. Was it murder, accident or suicide?
The circumstances of the death remain shrouded in mystery and as it occurred in what was then a remote and largely unpoliced portion of Tennessee, what records there are may be interpreted and reinterpreted for substantiation or refutation of any of the three alternatives. However, document and handwriting analysis yields substantial reason to believe that some of the key documents are fabrications, attributable to General James Wilkinson, Burr’s erstwhile ally, and others known to be in league with he and Burr.
The motivations to eliminate Lewis and to make it appear that he committed suicide fit neatly with the logic of a conspiracy. After all, not too many suicide victims need to shoot themselves TWICE in one sitting to end their own lives.
[50]
JESSE JAMES: DEAD OR ALIVE
Now let us ask, to collect the reward money did Bob and Charlie Ford really shoot the unarmed Jesse James as he adjusted a crooked picture on the wall of his house in Saint Joseph, Missouri? Well, no doubt, they collected the reward money.
Rumors abounded that Jesse was not dead.
[51] Both Fords had been associated with the James Gang
[52] as local folks from the same town and social circles as the James Brothers. For Jesse, wouldn’t it be nice to start a new life, free of the infamy surrounding his name and free of the law, which then need not continue pursuing a dead man?
In 1995, James Starrs, noted George Washington University law professor and forensics expert performed DNA testing on the body in the grave reputed to be that of Jesse James. Matching the DNA to persons identified as living related descendants, Starrs concluded that without a doubt Jesse James is buried in the grave of Jesse James.
[53]
However, one J. L. Courtney claimed to have researched the identity of his grandfather, James L. Courtney, who claimed within his family circle to be the real Jesse James. The evidence offered is compelling and, as carried on by his daughter, Betty Dorsett Duke, includes a critique and refutation of the Starrs DNA investigation that at least restores a reasonable doubt to the controversy.
[54]
To me, it makes more sense for Jesse James and the Fords to have collaborated on the hoax, not only to give Jesse a fresh start, but to collect the reward money, of which, no doubt, Jesse would have received a goodly share. (And did it occur to Professor Starrs that just maybe the person in the grave is indeed a relative, but not Jesse himself?)
Opportunity. Means. Motive!
FDR & PEARL HARBOR
Before Pearl Harbor, Franklin Roosevelt and British Prime Minister Winston Churchill had set up a busy back-channel of communications.
[55] Roosevelt’s anti-Axis sympathies were well established, despite the flak he was taking from the isolationists in both major political parties. Like his patron, Woodrow Wilson, who had campaigned in 1916 for re-election on the slogan “He Kept Us Out of War” referring to then raging World War I conflict, Franklin Roosevelt ran for re-election in 1940, promising that “Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars.”
[56] Once re-elected, despite FDR’s best efforts to stem Axis aggression by being the “Arsenal of Democracy” it was still the case in 1941 that Britain’s ability to survive remained tenuous - to win far-fetched
[57] - even with the Soviet Union now in the war as reluctant ally, having been the victim of a surprise attack by Hitler, whose military resurgence had been nurtured by the Soviets he now betrayed.
[58]
The U-Boat sinking of the unarmed Lusitania with hundreds of American aboard had provided the pretext for Wilson to ask Congress for a declaration of war for America to enter World War I on the side of Britain and France. In 1941 it was abundantly clear that unlike Wilson’s situation, the mere sinking of a ship with American civilians aboard was not going to produce for Roosevelt the same kind of public outrage that marshaled the nation for World War I. (Though in classic conspiracy theorist justification, it has since surfaced that the Lusitania was unquestionably carrying munitions in violation of international law and that fact had been discovered by the Germans, who acted on the intelligence to sink the ship.
[59]) Indeed, in 1940 the German U-Boats had already attacked and sunk another passenger ship, the Athenia (on the first day of WWII no less) in sort of a carbon copy of the Lusitania incident as over 100 Americans were aboard the Athenia..
[60] More remarkably, a U.S. destroyer, the Reuben James, was sunk while escorting a British convoy resulting in the death of American sailors.
[61] While there was an American outcry in each event, it was comparatively muted and Roosevelt recognized that this time around Congress was not going to declare war on account of one or even two torpedoed ships.
Prior to the Pearl Harbor attack, the U.S. had broken the Japanese Foreign Office Code.
[62] U.S. spies like Mo Berg, a baseball player on a goodwill tour to Japan, had been gauging Japanese capabilities and intentions.
[63] At President Roosevelt’s behest, the U.S. had embargoed scrap metal and petroleum shipments to Japan, which were desperately needed by that island nation to fuel its economy and war machine as the Japanese fought with the Chinese, Koreans, British, Dutch, French and their respective colonials.
Roosevelt’s motive was strong; the desire to save the world from Fascism. If the Fascists attacked, then war would be fully justified. The embargo and obvious coziness with the allies coupled with the code-breaking all provoked the critical opportunity. The Japanese, partners of the Germans, played their part all too well by launching a “sneak attack” on the U.S. Naval Base at Pearl Harbor, granting Means, and – voila – Congress finally recognized the danger, declaring war on Japan after Roosevelt’s “Day of Infamy” speech. [A speech so good and so moving, I think a draft had been prepared well in advance, with the final polishing facts introduced into it during the hours between the attack and Roosevelt’s address to Congress.] Three days later, War was declared as well between the U.S. and Japan’s two principal allies, Germany and Italy. The desiderata of intervention in World War II had been accomplished. Quod Erat Demonstrandum!
[In a sidelight to the Pearl Harbor story, we might consider here whether Amelia Earhart’s ill-fated round the world flight was itself a spy mission commissioned by President Roosevelt. And, if so, was Earhart in fact shot down, captured and/or executed by the Japanese? Not so sure on this one, but not so unsure either.]
ROOSEVELT,CERMAK & ZANGARA
Speaking of FDR, he was reportedly the victim of an assassination attempt in 1932, while President-elect. Seems he was visiting Miami, Florida and had just given a speech, One of the Democratic luminaries attending the event was the Mayor of Chicago, Anton Cermak, who came over to talk to Roosevelt as the event was winding down. The story is that an Italian immigrant, Giuseppe Zangara, pulled out a pistol and fired as Roosevelt and Cermak chatted together at Roosevelt’s open car. Roosevelt was not hit. Cermak, on the other hand, caught a bullet and died three weeks later from the fatal wound.
[64]
Two related theories supply the motive. One was that Cermak was on the outs with Chicago Mob Boss Frank Nitti and had tried to have Nitti killed, so Nitti’s hit on Cermak was protective retaliation.
[65] The other is that Cermak had promised to clean out Frank Nitti and the rest of the Chicago Mob so the assassination was a pre-emptive strike.
[66] Zangara was portrayed as yet another madman who hated the rich and powerful and so he decided to kill Roosevelt, but accidentally shot the wrong guy. I don’t buy it.
Ron Kumble’s book establishes a conclusive relationship between Zangara and the Nitti gang and posits that Zangara was coerced to act in the plot.
[67] The plan included having mob guys in uniform who were to “arrest” Zangara who would help him escape, which gave Zangara hope he could survive the effort. (Nitti had used fake policeman to pull off the Saint Valentine’s Day Massacre. Fake police would also be reported at President Kennedy’s assassination.
[68]) The plot also involved at least one additional shooter with a high powered rifle (sound familiar?).
In an interesting twist to the story, one reporter who was an early adherent of the Capone pre-emptive strike story was influential columnist Walter Winchell. From 1959 to 1963 Winchell’s voice was heard as narrator on the Tv hit show The Untouchables based on exploits of federal agent Elliott Ness, played by actor Robert Stack.
[69]
In one two-part Untouchables episode, entitled The Unhired Assassin (re-broadcast as a 1960 Tv movie retitled as The Gun of Zangara) Al Capone’s successor, Frank Nitti, the consistent antagonist in the series, decides to have Cermak murdered by an assassin firing a high powered rifle from a hotel room overlooking the site of FDR’s speech. As the shooter prepares to fire, Zangara suddenly emerges and does the job for them.
[70] It would be interesting if the story was half right; i.e. if Zangara was the distraction, but in fact the rifleman completed the job. Even more interesting is the compelling question: Was this modus operandi with its hidden additional shooter(s) and convenient patsy, Zangara, a blueprint for the Kennedy killings, with their patsies Oswald and Sirhan Sirhan?
LYNDON JOHNSON & THE GULF OF TONKIN
Last of my listed conspiracies, I believe that the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which provided the legal justification for the Viet Nam War, was a trumped up, fabricated event, which Lyndon Johnson engineered to justify the American action that he thought was necessary in Viet Nam. It seems that Johnson reasoned, like his hero, Franklin Roosevelt, that a bit of Presidential disingenuousness in the national interest would be not only excusable, but laudable, the more so when and if later generations learned the truth of Johnson’s own “heroic” efforts to lead the nation in a time of strife. Without such a Congressional resolution, Johnson dared not issue the orders for increasing American troop strength in Viet Nam and for Americans to engage in active offensive combat against the Viet Cong. Indeed, there may have been a real question as to whether the necessary funding for those military activities would have been available without the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution backstopping the strategy. Johnson’s motive seems a two factor mixture of Presidential resolve. First, to not be blamed for “losing” Viet Nam as Truman had “lost” China and second, plain old Presidential ego to prove that Lyndon Johnson was too tough an hombre to be beaten by old Ho Chi Minh.
In point of fact, the recent book, Lessons in Disaster by Gordon Goldstein
[71] has raised the level of submitted proof to clear and convincing evidence, though not quite beyond a reasonable doubt. Goldstein collaborated with Johnson’s (formerly Kennedy’s) National Security Advisor, McGeorge Bundy, on a planned book reviewing Bundy’s National Security Council experiences as those experiences related to Viet Nam. Apparently inspired by Secretary of Defense McNamara’s retrospective book,
[72] Bundy became intent on making his own search for understanding as to how the American participation in the War developed and expanded, searching for the lessons that would benefit future Presidents and their administrations.
Bundy died of a (not suspicious) heart attack before his book could be written, but Goldstein’s book is about the collaboration and Goldstein’s access to Bundy’s conclusions and thoughts gleaned during preparatory research and planning. Goldstein’s book is based in large measure on Bundy’s own handwritten notes and the minutes of their conversations, as well as many declassified documents to which they had access.
From that raw material, it is quite clear that Bundy had concluded that, at minimum, Johnson engaged in a significant degree of chicanery with the Tonkin incident to manipulate Congress, the media and public opinion to support Americanization of the War through large expansion of the troop commitment and changes in the rules of engagement authorizing offensive operations.
NON-CONSPIRACIES
Lest my paranoia be misconstrued as hopelessly consuming, I wish to point out that I am not enamored of every conspiracy theory that buds from the soils of suspicion or cynicism. There are quite a few conspiracy theories that I find do not add up or have been satisfactorily disproved. To wit:
President McKinley was assassinated by Leon Czolgosz, a committed anarchist. Some wondered if there was an anarchist conspiracy, but a fairly recent book, Murdering McKinley
[73] seems to conclusively establish that Czolgosz acted alone, motivated by the knowledge that he was dying of (then incurable) syphilis, so shooting the President was an opportunity to make something of himself within the context of his intense beliefs and have the State save him by swift electrocution from a slow, horribly painful and repulsive death. No conspiracy here.
In recent years questions had been raised about the death of President Zachary Taylor, who supposedly died not long after eating a bowl of cherries and drinking ice cold milk. An exhumation and autopsy yielded no trace of a poison or other evidence of wrongdoing
[74] and if the cherries or milk caused the death it is likely those famous foods simply harbored one of Mother Nature’s unfriendly microbes to the detriment of the late and lamented President Taylor. No conspiracy.
How about the trainbound death of President Warren G. Harding on the way back to San Francisco from Washington State? One “conspiracy” rumor is that he was poisoned by his wife, Florence, who was furious over his dalliances with alleged mistress, Nan Britton, and perhaps other ladies. The other theory is that his murder was somehow connected with the famed Teapot Dome Scandal, which was just beginning to unfold.
[75]
As to Florence, there was no benefit for her if her husband died; it would mean no more White House, which as First Lady she reportedly enjoyed very much. Further, there is no historical evidence that Harding had developed any strategy or plans for Teapot Dome, which he had just learned about during the trip by telegram days before his death. Apart from the lack of logic as to both theoretical motives, all the evidence seems to suggest that in fact Harding died of a heart attack, perhaps triggered by the stress of learning of the corruption within his administration in the form of the Teapot Dome Scandal. So of all Presidential deaths, this seems about the most straightforward.
Nor does there seem to be the least hint of conspiracy in the failed assassination attempt on President Reagan by the certifiably insane John Hinckley, whose mental similarity to Mark David Chapman, the killer of musician John Lennon, is tragically distressing. [A few conspiracy theories have arisen around the death of John Lennon, but I do not subscribe to them as there seems to be insufficient motive.]
Nor do I believe that either or both of the two attempts on the life of President Ford, one by Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme and the other by Sarah Jane Moore, were part of any grand conspiracy. To the extent there were any others involved, the Manson cult to which Fromme belonged
[76] supplied all the twisted motive necessary for that unbalanced woman. And Moore had her own mental issues.
[77] No conspiracies here, either.
AND SOME QUESTIONABLES
But four other violent incidents make me wonder:
I formerly believed President James Garfield’s assassination had to be the product of a well-planned conspiracy, masterminded by political boss Roscoe Conkling, in which convicted assassin, Charles Guiteau, a supposed obsessed madman, was an unwitting accomplice. But after reading Ken Ackerman’s book Dark Horse: The Surprise Election and Political Murder of President James A. Garfield
[78] I now have reasonable doubts. Here’s the basic story:
In 1880, the Republican Party, still dominant in Presidential elections as the Party of Lincoln, was at war within itself between those calling for reform of the notorious spoils system and those who believed that to the victor belonged the spoils. The reformers were known as the “Liberals;” the stand-patters as the “Stalwarts.” Another group, the “Half Breeds” sought to bridge the bitter political gap between Liberals and Stalwarts, supporting some reforms but not a complete end to the spoils system.
[79]
Conkling, New York State GOP boss, was the leader of the Stalwarts.. (No doubt, anybody on the other side of the ticket from the notorious Boss Tweed and Tammany Hall had to be one tough cookie.) In 1870, Conkling had gained control of the New York Customs House and by 1880 his chosen custodian in control of that operation was one Chester Alan Arthur, a loyal Republican if there ever was one.
[80]
The 1880 GOP convention was deadlocked with candidates from all three factions fighting for supremacy among the delegates. Former President Ulysses Grant had Stalwart support for an unprecedented third term, the Liberals coalesced around Vermont Senator George Edmunds and the Half-Breeds were committed to James G. Blaine, the famed “Plumed Knight” Senator from Maine, who was Conkling’s bitterest political enemy. However, Ohioan James Garfield, Speaker of the House of Representatives and a lukewarm Half-Breed with ties to the Stalwarts finally emerged as a strong contender on the 35th ballot as the dark horse compromise candidate and was put across in the 36th ballot. It was a shift in Stalwart support, engineered by Conkling, primarily to stop his hated enemy Blaine, that put Garfield across.
[81]
Supposedly as a peace offering to the Stalwarts and Party uniting move, the Vice Presidency was offered to none other than Conkling’s protégé, Chester Alan Arthur.
[82] I conjecture there was something more to the deal that remains lost in the smoke-filled rooms of the long dissolved convention. After all, the Customs House Collector for the Port of New York was not the usual or most illustrious stepping stone to the Vice Presidency of the United States and those working for Garfield and against Blaine were obviously not political babes in the woods.
After beating Democrat Winfield Scott Hancock (the former Union General of Civil War fame) in the 1880 election, Garfield proceeded to staff up the government, but did so without adequate deference to Stalwart sensitivities or Conkling’s expectations. So outraging were Garfield’s choices for so many federal appointments, especially for Arthur’s old Collector’s job, that Conkling (along with his fellow New York Senator, Tom Platt) resigned his Senate seat in protest. Talk about anger. Talk about motive.
If you are a conspiracy theorist, it comes as no surprise that on July 2, 1881, less than 120 days after inauguration, James Garfield was shot in the Baltimore and Potomac Railroad Station in downtown Washington by Charles Guiteau, an avowed Stalwart; so avowed that immediately after shooting Garfield he proudly declared, “I am a Stalwart and Arthur will be President.”
[83] Evidence to this date indicates that any personal link between Guiteau and Conkling is extremely tenuous at best.
[84]
Ackerman found nothing at all incriminating, and like others before him, shows that in official transcripts Guiteau’s professed motive was to restore Stalwart control for the good of the country, which incidentally would make him a hero and provide him with the consular position he had convinced himself he had earned in working for the GOP ticket’s election victory.
[85] It seems indubitable that Guiteau was indeed mentally unstable, even outright insane. Ackerman’s narrative, based on Guiteau’s own writings, testimony and other primary sources, is close to convincing that Guiteau acted without any outside prompting or help. But just because he was mad and shot the President, it doesn’t mean there was no conspiracy. My doubts persist because the motive for Conkling was so strong. The lack of evidence of a firm link between Conkling (and/or loyal underlings) doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. It just means it has not been proven – so far.
Now consider the Lindbergh baby kidnapping, in which the famed aviator’s toddler son was supposedly snatched from his crib in the Lindbergh mansion and then turned up dead in a shallow grave along a lonely road. There are some curious facts. Several theories have arisen, most notably that organized crime was again the culprit. German immigrant Bruno Richard Hauptmann, formerly of the Kaiser’s army in WWI, went to the electric chair, a perfect villain in the first electronic-media-driven “Crime of the Century.”
[86]
Noel Behn’s book
[87] suggests, with substantial circumstantial evidence, but not evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, that in fact, the baby died at home accidentally at the hands of Lindbergh’s sister-in-law and the Lindberghs themselves concocted the kidnapping story to protect her. The various ransom demands then presumably came from opportunists (probably including some organized crime figures) and the Lindberghs had to play along lest their own cover-up be exposed.
On the other hand, at least one other book has suggested – with some weighty evidence - that the dead toddler found was not the Lindbergh baby, but was a false planted lead of some unfortunate waif. Instead, the real Lindbergh child, with no memory of infancy, ended up raised by another family, because the case was so “hot” that the kidnappers decided it was too dangerous to collect the ransom.
[88]
I’m led to consider that it was altogether possible the kidnapping was the work of Organized Crime (for whom kidnapping was a big 1920’a moneymaker). Al Capone promised to find the baby if released from jail, but was turned down.
[89] It makes sense Al would make that promise if he was sure he could deliver. What better way to be sure of delivery than if he controlled the kidnapping? When the offer was turned down it would be classic sour grapes to have the baby killed or, better yet, to fake the death with an already dead child and sell the infant or use him to repay or curry favor. Motive, motive…
The possibility remains that the murdered baby was indeed their son and the real murderer was caught and punished OR the real murderer was never identified and found.
Next case: Is it possible Franklin Roosevelt or adherents of his were the progenitors of the assassination of Huey Long, the corrupt “Kingfish” and ultra-populist Louisiana Governor? It was common knowledge that Long, a Democrat, had fallen out with the President. Speculation was rife Long would challenge Roosevelt for the Presidency in 1936, perhaps by primary, perhaps as a third party candidate. Long’s death, to say the least, had to be a relief and convenience for FDR. Motive, but no connection is known to the means, Dr. Carl Weiss, who reportedly had a family political grudge as his motive.
On the other hand, Weiss was shot at the scene in a hail of bullets from Long’s bodyguards. Could it be that one of the bodyguards was acting on behalf of the President? Or, maybe, Long was accidentally shot by one of his own guards as they tried to protect him from the perceived (actual?) threat Weiss apparently presented?
The fourth unsettled (and unsettling) incident is the disturbing possibility that Richard Nixon or one or more of his adherents had a hand in provoking or inducing Arthur Bremer to proceed with the shooting of Governor George Wallace during the primaries in 1972, when Nixon was running for re-election. There seems little doubt that if a healthy George Wallace had run in 1972 as an independent, the Nixon team would certainly have been even more concerned that Wallace would split off enough votes from Nixon to hand the election to the Democratic candidate,
[90] much as Teddy Roosevelt’s challenge as a Bull Moose candidate to President William Howard Taft had put Woodrow Wilson in the White House in 1912.
[91] It was reported that Bremer’s diary (how convenient!) contained information that Bremer had also stalked Nixon (also convenient?) in the hopes of shooting him, but had been unable to act because Nixon’s security was just too good.
[92] 1972, after all, was the year of Watergate dirty tricks and all manner of shenanigans connected to the re-election of President Nixon. Could it be?
What’s so very disturbing about this concept is the broader question of whether Bremer could have been under hypnotic control a la Sirhan Sirhan or maybe a la Lee Harvey Oswald. If so, could there then be a link between those two election-related events in which Richard Nixon was a candidate? If so, the other thought that occurs is that the manipulator of these events (and this is really getting into conspiracy paranoia) was once again, Organized Crime.
How so? Well, really plumbing the depths of paranoia, consider that in late 1971, as election year 1972 was about to dawn, Richard Nixon commuted the prison sentence of Teamster Boss Jimmy Hoffa, resulting in Hoffa’s release from Lewisburg Prison after serving almost five years for, among other things, corruption in connection with the administration of the Mid-States Pension Fund. Over the years there had been rumblings of connections between Richard Nixon and various elements of organized crime.
[93] Was the Hoffa commutation part of a deal or just a Nixonian political play for support (including campaign contributions) of the Teamster’s Union, in which Hoffa remained hugely popular with the rank and file, though he was legally barred from participating in Union affairs or holding any position with the Union?
What was to be gained by a Nixonian victory? Was Nixon calling in debts for some prior favors or making a deal of which the Hoffa commutation was one piece?
(If you really distrust Richard Nixon you can focus on another chilling coincidence, unknown to many, that Nixon was in Dallas on the day JFK was shot, doing work in connection with his law practice on behalf of client Pepsi-Cola.
[94])
It is, also noteworthy that the connections of the Kennedy family to organized crime were far more tangible than Nixon’s, including such arresting facts as John Kennedy’s sharing of mistress Judith Campbell Exner with Chicago Godfather Sam Giancana, JFK’s close friendship and partying with Frank Sinatra and his Mob compatriots and, of course, the bootlegging and securities frauds past of patriarch Joseph Kennedy, during which he had associated with and sometimes competed with many of the legendary Prohibition Era crime figures like Meyer Lansky and Lucky Luciano.
[95]
Deals, revenge, ambition, blackmail, advantage, money, power, fame – MOTIVE!
CONCLUSION: THE TRUTH SHALL MAKE YOU FREE
[96]
The point of all this discussion is that I believe the touchstone for understanding human action is the basic notion of human motivation. Except perhaps in the most profoundly stricken of the mentally ill, truly random acts do not occur in human existence. All of our activities, from the trivial to the most trenchant, have a purpose, whether it is (among the infinite possibilities) slaking thirst, finding love, nurturing progeny or fulfilling highest ambitions.
For me, simple explanations like madness or blind hatred usually do not compute. All too often in times of striking events, such simple explanations are too rapidly invoked by the media (inspired by whom, I wonder, with my suspicions of conspiracy) and swallowed by the public.
No doubt, the truth is sometimes very hard to take. But I believe that the best way to advance ourselves and our society is to deal four-square with reality and truth. Let us recognize that engagement in conspiracies always has as a fundamental element concealment of the truth, whether to facilitate the desired outcome, to protect against undesired consequences for procuring the desired outcome (whether or not successful) or, most often, both. To know the truth and reality in the field of human endeavor, including but not limited to conspiracies, one must explore the human motivation that engenders and explains human conduct and behavior.
Especially when the stakes are great.
[1] See, Warren Commission, Report of the Warren Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy, p.380, inter alia (USGPO, 1964)
[2] See, Kaiser, Robert Blair, RFK Must Die! Chasing the Mystery of the Robert Kennedy Assassination, 2d ed. Overlook Press (NY, 2008)
[3] See, Starrs, James E. & Gale, Kira, The Death of Merriwether Lewis, River Junction Press (Omaha, 2009)
[4] Tonkin Gulf Resolution; Public Law 88-408, 88th Congress, August 7, 1964.
[5] See, Kumble, Ronald, Frank Nitti: The True Story of Chicago’s Notorious “Enforcer”, Barricade Books (Fort Lee, NJ, 2007)
[6] See, Tidwell, William A., April ’65 (Kent State U. Press, 1995)
[7] Id.
[8] Id.
[9] Not to be confused with Jay Winik’s book, April, 1865.
[10] See Tidwell, op. cit.
[11] See all 3 referenced books as to the foregoing factual assertions.
[12] See Evans, Eli N., Judah Benjamin: Te Jewish Confederate (Free Press, 1998)
[13] See Tidwell, et al, op.cit.
[14] Id.
[15] See Tidwell, Hall & Gaddy, op. cit
[16] See, e.g. Taylor, John M. & Paschall, Rod, Duty Faithfully Performed: Robert E. Lee and His Critics, Potomac Books (Washington, 2000)
[17] See Evans, op. cit.
[18] See Tidwell, et al, op.cit.
[19] Id.
[20] It is apparently the case that one of the key tactical conspirators, Lewis Powell, was in fact one of Mosby’s Rangers specially detailed by The Gray Ghost himself to work with Booth. Tidwell, id.
[21] Id.
[22] Harper Perennial (NY, 2006)
[23] See, e.g. Fox, Sylvan, The Unanswered Questions About the Kennedy Assassination, NY Award (NY, 1975)
[24] Summers, Anthony, Not in Your Lifetime, (Marlowe (UK),1998)
[25] 29 U.S.C. 401, et seq., especially 482
[26] See O’Brien, Michael, John F. Kennedy: A Biography (MacMillan, 2006).
[27] See Jacobs, John, Mobsters, Unions and Feds: The Mafia and the American Labor Movement, 15 & 119 (NYU Press, 2006)
[28] See Summers, op. cit.
[29] Id. and See Kumble, op. cit.
[30] Id.
[31] Id.
[32] See Stern, Sheldon, The Week The World Stood Still (Stanford U. Press, 2005)
[33] See Summers, Anthony, Official & Confidential: The Secret Life of J. Edgar Hoover (Pocket Books, 1994)
[34] Id.
[35] See Wyden, Peter, The Bay of Pigs: The Untold Story (Simon & Schuster, 1980)
[36] Shortly after the Bay of Pigs invasion fiasco in 1961, Kennedy had Dulles and Bissell dismissed from the Agency and appointed McCone as CIA Director, who was promptly confirmed by the Senate.
[37] See Caro, Robert A., The Years of Lyndon Johnson, Vols. 1-3 (Vintage Books)
[38] See, McDonald, Hugh and Moore, Robin, Eyes Only: LBJ and the JFK Conspiracy, Condor (Westport, CT, 1978)
[39] See, e.g. Posner, Gerald, Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK, Random House (NY, 1993)
[40] See Kumble, 201, op. cit.
[41] See White, Theodore, The Making of the President 1960 (Pocket Books, 1961)
[42] See Kaiser, op. cit.
[43] Id.
[44] Id.
[45] Id.
[46] Id.
[47] See, Television Show: Frontline, The Princess & The Press, Show #1606 (PBS, 11/16/97)
[48] See BBC News: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7250002.stm
[49] Alleyne & Price, Princess Diana’s Letters of Love to Dodi Fayed, London Telegraph Newspaper, 12/15/2007.
[50] See Starrs & Gale, op. cit.
[51] See Dorsett, Betty Duke, The TRUTH about Jesse James, rev. ed. (Fiddler’s Green Press, 2008); and see www.jessejamesintexas.com.
[52] Id.
[53] See, Starrs and Gale,
[54] See Dorsett, op. cit.
[55] See Stafford, David, Roosevelt and Churchill: Men of Secrets (Overlook, 2000)
[56] Campaign Speech, Boston 10/30/40;Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations, 15th ed., 780:11 (1982). Consider that once the U.S. was attacked at Pearl Harbor, this was no longer a “foreign war” and thus FDR spoke the truth.
[57] See, e.g., Gannon, Michael, Black May, Harper Collins (NY, 1989)
[58] See. e.g., Kolasky, John, Partners In Tyranny: The Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact (Canada, 1990)
[59] See Hoehling, A.A., The Last Voyage of the Lusitania, Madison (Toronto, 1996)
[60] See, Stafford, op. cit., 21.
[61] See, Gannon, op. cit., 79.
[62] See, Stafford, op. cit., 44.
[63] See Davidoff, Nicholas, The Catcher Was A Spy, Vintage (NY, 1995)
[64] See Humble, Ronald D., Frank Nitti: The True Story of Chicago’s Notorious Enforcer (Barricade Books, Fort Lee, NJ, 2007)
[65] Id.
[66] Id.
[67] Id.
[68] See, e.g. Weisberg, Harold, Whitewash- the Report on the Warren Report, 198-199, Dell (NY, 1965)
[69] See, Museum of Television: http://www.museum.tv/eotvsection.php?entrycode=untouchables
[70] See, http://www.answers.com/topic/guns-of-zangara
[71] Holt (NY, 2008)
[72] McNamara, Robert, In Retrospect: The Tragedy and Lessons of Viet Nam, Vintage (NY, 1996).
[73] Rauchway, Eric, Murdering McKinley: The Making of Theodore Roosevelt’s America (Jill & Wang, NY, 2003)
[74] Eisenhower, John S.D., Zachary Taylor (Times Books, NY, 2008)
[75] See, Russell, Frances, The Shadow Of Blooming Grove, McGraw-Hill (NY, 1968)
[76] See, Bravin, Jess, Squeaky: The Life and Times of Lynette Alice Fromme, St. Martin’s (NY, 1997_
[77] See, Spieler, Geri, Taking Aim: The Remarkable Story of the Woman Who Shot at Gerald Ford, Palgrave McMillan (NY, 2008)
[78] Ackerman, Kenneth, Dark Horse: The Surprise Election and Political Murder of President James A. Garfield (Carroll & Graf, 2003)
[79] Id.
[80] Karabell & Schlesinger, Chester Alan Arthur (Times Books, 2004)
[81] See Ackerman, op. cit.
[82] Id.
[83] See, Ackerman, op. cit.
[84] See, Ackerman, op cit.
[85] See, Ackerman, op. cit.
[86] See, Berg. A. Scott, Lindbergh, Putnam (NY, 1998)
[87] Behn, Noel, Lindberg: The Crime, Onyx (, 1995)
[88] Unlocated
[89] See, Kumble, op. cit.
[90] See, White, Theodore H., Making of the President - 1972, Bantam (NY, 1972)
[91] See, Chace, James, 1912: Wilson, Roosevelt, Taft and Debs – The Election That Changed the Country, Simon & Schuster (NY, 2005)
[92] Bremer, Arthur, An Assassins Diary, Pocket Books (NY, 1973)
[93] See, e.g. Gerth, Jeff, Nixon and The Mafia, Sundance (1972)
[94] See, Ambrose, Stephen, Nixon: Vol. 2: The Triumph of a Politician 1962-1972, Touchstone (NY, 1990)
[95] See, e.g. Davis, John, Mafia Kingfish: Carlos Marcello and the Assassination of John F. Kennedy, Signet (NY, 1989)
[96] John viii.32.
