45 years ago, as young boy, I watched the murder of a US President on TV.

The family gathered round our giant early 60s black and white cathode ray tube and followed the drama agog. Like most of the world, we were truly shocked and awed. The tragedy made a deep impression on me and countless others. It was one of those moments when the world seemed to stop, in astonishment and in fear.

Two days later, I watched as Lee Harvey Oswald, the President’s alleged assassin, was also shot in front of the cameras.

By that time in my life, I’d already seen a few murder mysteries on television and read a few children’s thrillers. When Ruby killed Oswald, I remember thinking this was no ‘normal’ plot. Something was very odd about the murder of JFK. Further episodes could be anticipated before the tale was told.

In the years that followed 1963, I grew into a young man and became quite politically active. At university ten years later I gravitated to people on the left. My main political passion, since my late teens, was the peace movement, but I was interested in social justice and environmental issues too.

While a student, I occasionally asked friends and mentors about JFK. I recall being told, to paraphrase, that JFK was ‘just another establishment capitalist robber-baron militarist’.  To the question: “Who killed JFK?”, a common answer was “Who cares?” I may have made similar quips myself from time to time. Such is the power of persuasion and apparent consensus, laced with a liberal dash of cynicism.

Later on as an adult, I remained interested in politics and world affairs. In the late 1980s, when the rigid old-style communist system in the USSR began to loosen up through Glasnost and Perestroika – and South Africa began a miraculous transformation from nuclear-armed apartheid State into one democratic nation led by Nelson Mandela – things definitely seemed to be on the up.

The descent back into war-oriented hell, in retrospect, started almost immediately. George Bush Senior’s hi-tech offensive against Iraq in 1990/1 was the first bell (allegedly, it overcame the ‘Vietnam defeat syndrome’). Then the Balkans slid into conflict and turmoil erupted in parts of an impoverished Russian nation.

Around the mid-1990s, a brief opportunity for reconciliation in Israel/Palestine flitted like a butterfly on a sunny moment between storms, but after the assassination of Prime Minister Rabin that prospect receded fast.

By the time George Bush II was ‘elected’ President (by the US Supreme Court) in late 2000, the optimism of the late 1980s had largely dissipated. No one was speaking of peace dividends any more. Far from receding, the war machine was clearly on the ascendant, yet again. It was alarming to imagine what might come next.

We didn’t have to wait long. On September 11th 2001, I happened to be staying up late on a warm Australian evening, with the TV playing silently in the background as I typed away. Suddenly, Australian broadcasting switched programming to the CNN live feed. I hit the sound. The centralized programming reminded me of the Gulf War… but with a difference. This time, live on CNN, I was watching mass slaughter in the USA itself.

I was glued to the television most of the night and into the next day. But using my dial-up Internet connection, on this occasion I also explored the internet. Access to the net made an absolutely crucial difference.

To cut to the chase, within a few months I realized that the events of 9-11 were not as presented in the almost universally acknowledged ‘official version’.

Whatever did happen on 9-11, it certainly wasn’t that. The official story was bogus. Clearly three giant skyscrapers in NYC did not collapse as a result of fire. Co-ordination of this entire atrocity was not from a cave in Afghanistan. People were being asked to believe in utter absurdities: absurdities that justified new atrocities. Voltaire’s warning was coming true in front of my eyes.

It took a fair amount of time and effort – mainly using the Internet – to establish this for myself beyond a reasonable doubt. I had a lot of help on the way from others around the world who, in the first year after the 9-11 attacks, shared doubts and worked to discover the truth. The contribution of some of these people has not been adequately recorded.

In particular, the Canadian mathematician Professor Kee Dewdney shone through to me, from the first time I encountered him, as a meticulously  honest and dedicated researcher with a brilliant analytical mind and remarkable personal courage. In those early days after 9-11, it was a frightening time to doubt. Bush had declared the world to be either with him or against. He railed against ‘outrageous conspiracy theories’. No one knew for sure, at the time, what the consequences of dissent might be.

Along with his network of scientists, Dewdney helped put in place the foundations of disbelief on which many others have subsequently built.

As I adjusted to my new reality as a ’9-11 sceptic’, the hardest thing to come to terms with was not the notion that Bush and his Administration were complicit in high crimes. Actually, I rather expected that – although not in not quite such spectacular fashion. My problem was coming to terms with the role of the mass media – and the other western intelligence agencies.

If I, with such limited resources, could figure out that 9-11 was bogus, how could they be so blind? Reluctantly, I came to the conclusion that they couldn’t be. I corresponded with journalists such as radio presenter Philip Adams in Australia, and the persistent lack of honest answers from people of his ilk helped me better appreciate the mass media’s propensity for serving as a gatekeeper of public opinion if given the signal to do so.

As well as understanding the broader socio-economic and cultural milieu in which something as huge as the 9-11 hoax could be presented as a fait accompli by the entire western mass media, I also felt the need to look backwards in time.

I wanted to understand whether 9-11 was the first major event to be systematically misreported – or if there had been others before. In that context, I decided to look again at the Kennedy assassination, at that time approaching its 40th anniversary.

I delved into some interesting literature. My first question was whether the ‘lone nut’ theory of the Warren Commission was, in fact, the truth – as claimed by conspiracy-debunker Gerald Posner in his well-publicized book Case Closed (published 1993).

The more I looked at the basic known facts of the assassination, the more I came to believe the ‘lone nut’ theory was ludicrous. Oliver Stone’s famous movie JFK shows why, very effectively. Obviously more than three bullets were fired – so a single shooter theory is an impossibility. Since Oswald could not have killed the President on his own as claimed by the Warren Commissio, there was indeed a conspiracy to murder President Kennedy – and a cover up afterwards.

But who was behind the conspiracy? That was much harder to figure out. There were so many contradictory theories. Some seemed factually based and plausible. Others didn’t. The overall impression, as I delved deeper into the world of JFK assassination enthusiasts, was confusion. So many claims! So many people still, after more than 40 years, researching, postulating and debating. I almost came back to the conclusion I’d arrived at decades before – that while Kennedy may have been killed in a conspiracy, we’d most likely never know who was ultimately responsible. The fog of time was setting in…

At some point in my investigations I came across Final Judgment by Michael Collins Piper. Actually, I encountered Piper’s name on the web before I read his book. The first time was in the context of an article about Mr Piper being chased off a university campus and prevented from meeting a student group to discuss his book. Apparently he upset the local Jewish lobby, who called him an ‘anti-Semite’ and ‘Holocaust denier’.

On further inquiry, I leant that Piper’s book on the JFK assassination, Final Judgment, had never been available in mainstream bookshops – although it’s an underground best seller (now in its sixth edition).

Labels such as ‘anti-Semite’ put me off somewhat, in a way they don’t today. At that time, I was almost ready to close the page on anyone accused of such a shocking thing. I’d been well conditioned to regard anyone described in such terms as beyond the pale. I’m more cautious now.

Part of what loosened me up about this was participating in web forums where Israel and Palestine are debated. I found myself branded with the exact same terms of abuse even, if I’d never mentioned World War Two or uttered a single phrase that could possibly be construed as bigoted. Over time, my phobia of expressions such as ‘anti-Semite’ diminished. Rather than decide whether to read an author’s work on the basis of someone else’s say-so, I emboldened myself to read the material directly and make up my own mind. These days, I regard the term ‘anti-Semitism’ as an essentially meaningless slur.

When I finally read Final Judgment, it seemed to me Piper’s theory explains the known facts about the case – and related assassinations such as the slaying of Robert Kennedy in 1968 – more comprehensively and completely than anything I’d ever read. I snapped the book closed with an authentic ‘case closed!’ sensation.

Not that there aren’t loose ends about the JFK assassination. There are many. But in my judgment, Mike Piper has essentially solved the mystery. I believe the truth is out.

The murder of President Kennedy was orchestrated by powerful figures in the World Zionist movement, in cahoots with a few leading figures in the State of Israel whose ‘intelligence agencies’ were also involved.

Since coming across Piper’s book, I’ve spent time on bulletin boards where the JFK assassination is still discussed. Everything I subsequently learned – and many of the debates I participated in – strengthened my impression that Piper is right. The case is essentially solved. I’ve come across new information that either supported or was at least compatible with his theory; I’ve encountered nothing that isn’t.

Piper is a few years younger than me. He must have been too young, when JFK was alive, to remember him first hand. That’s a pity, because Kennedy was inspiring, at least to my childish eyes. He seemed like a good guy.

Now, looking back at some of Jack Kennedy’s speeches and media encounters, it’s clear what a bright spark that man really was. I came to understand that as a boy, I had not just witnessed the killing of an average President. What I’d really watched was a brutal coup d’etat which had removed from office of a very special President, whose greatest initiatives have arguably been forgotten.

Instead of presenting Piper’s thesis here, I’ll go one better. Several years ago, Michael Collins Piper sent me a paper entitled: Final Judgment: the Missing Link in the JFK Assassination Conspiracy.

It’s a superb, very clear and quite short exposition of the case made in Final Judgment! I published at the time, but soon after ceased maintaining that website.

I trust Mike Piper will not mind me re-publishing it now. Although several years old, it rings as true for me as when I first read it. This is an important paper that should be on the web. My apologies it’s been missing so long.

Those of you who wish to know more can get hold of Piper’s book through this website. You can also listen to his regular weekday radio show on Republican Broadcasting Corporation.

A word about Mike Piper. Like me, he seems to have developed strong anti-war sentiments early in life. Unlike me, he entered a political milieu on the right-wing of (American) politics. His unapologetic associations, past and present, with people such as David Duke have for long been an easy way to discredit him in left wing and liberal circles, as well as on the ‘mainstream’ right.

I don’t share all of Piper’s views, but having listened regularly to his radio program since it came on air in early 2006 – and having read a substantial amount of his written material – I simply don’t believe he’s xenophobic.

Piper certainly is a very strong critic of Zionism – and of the Jewish culture within which Zionism is embedded and from which it sprang. He’s very knowledgeable about those topics and always seems keen to correct the record if merited. From I’ve observed, he has a very honest approach to journalism. He’s also highly courageous. Some of the most courageous Jewish anti-Zionist are among his associates. Above all, Mike Piper is an indispensable source of information about US politics and recent history.

It is an indictment of the unthinking and uncritical Judeophilia of the ‘western left’ that for so many decades the left was unable to find anyone within its ranks to piece the JFK assassination story together, as Piper did some 15 years ago (to my satisfaction at least). In a way, I think it’s illustrative of the malaise of the western left. Its adherents are so tamed, managed, diverted and bamboozled that all too often they simply can’t see the wood for the trees.

Piper saw the wood – and was able to breach the right-left ideological divide more easily than most left-wingers. After all, the President he wrote about – JFK – was a liberal icon, scarcely popular on the American right. Piper worked his way through an extraordinary labyrinth of information, misinformation and disinformation to solve the mystery and cast new light on the history of those momentous times.

As someone on the left with many years of interest in peace and the peace movement, I was staggered to learn two key things about JFK that I never, ever knew until my inquiries began afresh after 9-11.

First, Kennedy was breathing down the neck of the Israeli Government trying to prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons. These fierce debates were kept out of the public spotlight and came to light only after some significant archival releases in the early 1990s. Piper was not the first author to write about this new material – but he was the first to match motive with means and opportunity, closing the evidentiary noose.

Second, in 1961, despite the Cold War and swag of other problems lobbed Kennedy’s way in his first year of office, he spoke in person to the General Assembly of the United Nations and put a proposal entitled Freedom from War: United States Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World

This far reaching proposal was the first and only time, as far as I’m aware, that the leader of a modern nation has made a sweeping disarmament proposal to the entire world community.

Ironically, I found this speech and the State Department paper that accompanied it, not by reading a history of Kennedy written by any of the popular authors or even in Piper’s book. I discovered it initially on the website of an ultra-right wing American group, who presented it, with some glee, as evidence of a UN-led global conspiracy!

The collective amnesia of the western peace movement over Kennedy’s bold disarmament initiative seems remarkable to me. In Dallas Texas, a President was killed who:

1. was determined to stop Israel from becoming a nuclear-armed threat to its neighbours.
2. advocated global disarmament – and had a detailed plan to achieve it.

Why the blind spot on this very significant history?

Seeing Kennedy murdered, as a boy, I now realise I was witnessing a crucial and brutal landmark in an old saga, the existence of which I didn’t suspect for another 40 years. It was a ‘culling’ – and cover up – that demonstrated the immense power of the Zionist lobby and its close inter-relationship with elements in the US Government and the American military industrial complex. It proved also that other ‘satellites states’ in the western world, such as Britain and Australia, can be relied upon not to squeal.

After Kennedy was shot, the State of Israel, then only 15 years old, was able to resume its single-minded scramble to become a military superpower.

Comprehensive initiatives for world peace also have been off the mainstream agenda ever since (Gorbachev tried briefly, but without enduring success).

Like the current President of Iran, I believe that the State of Israel should be ‘removed from the pages of time’. This is partly because I believe that Israel was behind the murder of a US President, a murder carried out in full view of the world.

Through its support network in the USA, setting out layer upon layer of disinformation, with a little more culling here and there, it has managed to avoid mainstream exposure for this crime, at least to the present day.

Grasp this – and the extent of Zionist violence and trickery before and after 1963 falls into place. It also becomes plain how, since the early 1960s, support for Israel on Capitol Hill has become so universal and institutionalized. The killing in Dallas, to be precise, was not a coup d’etat; it was a crucial stage in a slow takeover of the American body politic.

I believe the Zionist network, in November 1963, was powerful enough – and brutal enough – to slay a US President in plan view and cover it up. No other network would have had the power to do all of that, even it is wished. Plenty of interests had a motive for killing JFK – and some could perhaps have carried it off. But only one network could cover up the crime afterwards and successfully shield the perpetrators for so long. Only the Zionist movement has the necessary influence in the mass media – and in other western countries.

It’s a grim thought that the Zionist network is better-connected now than then. Yet the glass isn’t just nearly empty. It’s also filling up…

In the 1960s, no one outside a few rarified circles suspected the Zionist leadership of a crime se egregious as the Kennedy assassination(s?). That’s not the case today.

Today, the world is watching. One might say that the Zionists have gained our full attention.

The Obama inauguration is a few days away. Not since JFK has America elected such a young and popular President who symbolizes the hope of a new generation.

At this time, it’s too early to tell the type of President Barak Obama will turn out to be. He faces unprecedented challenges on a range of fronts. But through its violent assault on Gaza, Israel is imposing the Palestine crisis on his attention from the outset.

It’s possible Obama will be a latter-day Lyndon Johnson, betraying America’s interests and playing stooge to the Zionists.

On the other hand, he may take the more principled road traveled by JFK and stand up to this aggressive foreign lobby – struggling to secure a fair deal for the Palestinians and to roll back America’s bloated war machine.

If so, a grateful world will be watching the new President’s back very closely. The Mossad, on this occasion, would be well advised to do everything in its power to ensure the President’s safety.

The next time a US President who stands up to the Zionist lobby is physically attacked, Israel won’t be the last suspect that springs to mind.

It’ll be the first.
__________________________________

See Final Judgment: the Missing Link in the JFK Assassination Conspiracy by Michael Collins Piper