Jim Garrison's 1967 Nationally Televised Rebuttal to NBC

[FourthBase]

Ordinarily this kind of youtube link might get posted in the video only thread, but this is too damned good for that. All of you who own a paperback copy of On the Trail of the Assassins should turn to pages 192-200, specifically page 199 (if you have the same version I do, I'm not sure how many versions exist). I'll type it out for those who don't own the book:

"Within several days after NBC aired the program, I sent off a furious letter of complaint to the Federal Communications Commission. I requested equal time to reply personally to the network's rapacious attack on my office.

The FCC made NBC provide me with a half hour to reply to the hour long White Paper. Not exactly equal time, but all I needed. I made my reply live from the network's local affiliate, WDSU-TV, and it was broadcast across the country.

Afterwards, I felt I had communicated my message, but I was not left with a satisfied feeling. I kept asking myself, why had NBC worked so long and hard to tear our case apart? Indeed, to tear our office apart."

Here is that half hour:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WS0p3tyZUlQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cats9ANQtk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxybNe7XuGM

Watching it, I was overcome by a few things, emotionally and intellectually.

First, this human being was a fucking HERO. No hero is perfect, and heroes often lose. But heroes can and do exist. Jim Garrison was one of them. The courage, dignity, sincerity, eloquence, and optimism Garrison demonstrates in that rebuttal makes my eyes water with admiration and my heart beat stronger with hope.

Second, no matter what a filmmaker attempted, any movie portrayal of Garrison was destined to be a hollow tribute. The true power of unsexy unmusical reality invariably trumps its fictional dressing-up and choreography. The real Jim Garrison will always be better than a fake Jim Garrison now matter how glorified. Oliver Stone exponentially compounded the inherent trappings of fiction by being (if I'm generous) an ego-tripping auteur douchebag who fancied his bloated artistic vision as something more important than Garrison's authentic story.

Third, note that Garrison merely wrote a letter to the FCC asking them for equal time, and the FCC forced NBC to broadcast an uninterrupted uncensored rebuttal from Garrison on national television which lasted about a half hour. Watch the whole thing again if you need to, I insist. Pinch yourself. Note how mind-boggingly blunt and incisive Garrison's remarks are on the government, on the media, and on the assassination itself.

Fourth, keep in mind the repeated sabotage, harassment, and libels he and his office directly suffered -- underhanded attacks on his reputation that were launched wide open in public, physical attacks on his case that were material and sometimes deadly. Consider also the kind of directly confrontational libel still thrown his way decades later in the form of pseudo-journalism like the piece of shit book False Witness.

Fifth, and this is what enrages me right now, forgive me...How on fucking earth can a sane or honest person have the gall to claim that a virtually-omnipotent national security apparatus would bother with a so-subtle-as-to-barely-exist tactical advantage of using a television program's name to confuse the future synapses of a tiny subset of children about the mere surname Garrison...but yet at the same time would allow the real Garrison himself an uninterrupted half hour of unsupervised network television exposure to air the foulest of their dirty laundry in a most dignified and persuasive way? There ought never to be again another bullshit claim involving Garrison and keyword hijacking, not that there was ever a reason for one before. Jim Garrison's heroic soul SHITS IN THE MOUTH of the person who would make such a bullshit claim.

[waugs]

yeah, but you forgot to mention that garrison's program was preempted by the Shaggy D.A.!

Ordinarily this kind of youtube link might get posted in the video only thread, but this is too damned good for that. All of you who own a paperback copy of On the Trail of the Assassins should turn to pages 192-200, specifically page 199 (if you have the same version I do, I'm not sure how many versions exist). I'll type it out for those who don't own the book:

"Within several days after NBC aired the program, I sent off a furious letter of complaint to the Federal Communications Commission. I requested equal time to reply personally to the network's rapacious attack on my office.

The FCC made NBC provide me with a half hour to reply to the hour long White Paper. Not exactly equal time, but all I needed. I made my reply live from the network's local affiliate, WDSU-TV, and it was broadcast across the country.

Afterwards, I felt I had communicated my message, but I was not left with a satisfied feeling. I kept asking myself, why had NBC worked so long and hard to tear our case apart? Indeed, to tear our office apart."

Here is that half hour:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WS0p3tyZUlQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cats9ANQtk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxybNe7XuGM

Watching it, I was overcome by a few things, emotionally and intellectually.

First, this human being was a fucking HERO. No hero is perfect, and heroes often lose. But heroes can and do exist. Jim Garrison was one of them. The courage, dignity, sincerity, eloquence, and optimism Garrison demonstrates in that rebuttal makes my eyes water with admiration and my heart beat stronger with hope.

Second, no matter what a filmmaker attempted, any movie portrayal of Garrison was destined to be a hollow tribute. The true power of unsexy unmusical reality invariably trumps its fictional dressing-up and choreography. The real Jim Garrison will always be better than a fake Jim Garrison now matter how glorified. Oliver Stone exponentially compounded the inherent trappings of fiction by being (if I'm generous) an ego-tripping auteur douchebag who fancied his bloated artistic vision as something more important than Garrison's authentic story.

Third, note that Garrison merely wrote a letter to the FCC asking them for equal time, and the FCC forced NBC to broadcast an uninterrupted uncensored rebuttal from Garrison on national television which lasted about a half hour. Watch the whole thing again if you need to, I insist. Pinch yourself. Note how mind-boggingly blunt and incisive Garrison's remarks are on the government, on the media, and on the assassination itself.

Fourth, keep in mind the repeated sabotage, harassment, and libels he and his office directly suffered -- underhanded attacks on his reputation that were launched wide open in public, physical attacks on his case that were material and sometimes deadly. Consider also the kind of directly confrontational libel still thrown his way decades later in the form of pseudo-journalism like the piece of shit book False Witness.

Fifth, and this is what enrages me right now, forgive me...How on fucking earth can a sane or honest person have the gall to claim that a virtually-omnipotent national security apparatus would bother with a so-subtle-as-to-barely-exist tactical advantage of using a television program's name to confuse the future synapses of a tiny subset of children about the mere surname Garrison...but yet at the same time would allow the real Garrison himself an uninterrupted half hour of unsupervised network television exposure to air the foulest of their dirty laundry in a most dignified and persuasive way? There ought never to be again another bullshit claim involving Garrison and keyword hijacking, not that there was ever a reason for one before. Jim Garrison's heroic soul SHITS IN THE MOUTH of the person who would make such a bullshit claim.

[Lord Balto]

I don't know how many of you folks listen to Black Op Radio, but it's worth listening to if you have any doubts about any of the assassinations of the past, and about 911 and other recent peculiar events. The front page is here: http://www.blackopradio.com/. The archived shows are here: http://www.blackopradio.com/archives2008.html. The shows with Jim DiEugenio are excellent (and sometimes quite funny) and the interviews with Fletcher Prouty are about as close as you're going to get to someone on the inside. Did you know that there were "police officers" at the scene wearing stage costumes?

[MinM]

I don't know how many of you folks listen to Black Op Radio, but it's worth listening to if you have any doubts about any of the assassinations of the past, and about 911 and other recent peculiar events. The front page is here: http://www.blackopradio.com/. The archived shows are here: http://www.blackopradio.com/archives2008.html. The shows with Jim DiEugenio are excellent (and sometimes quite funny) and the interviews with Fletcher Prouty are about as close as you're going to get to someone on the inside. Did you know that there were "police officers" at the scene wearing stage costumes?

Speaking of Black Op Radio and Jim DiEugenio. Here's an episode where he explains how, like Jim Garrison, Mort Sahl risked his career in pursuit of justice in the JFK case:
http://www.blackopradio.com/pod/black366a.mp3

Garrison, Sahl, and B-1 Bob on the Steve Allen Show:
http://www.blackopradio.com/pod/black365c.mp3

Here are a couple of pieces about this:

August 25 / 26, 2007
"My Grandfather Came from Lithuania--Though Lou Dobbs Tried to Stop Him"
Mort Sahl's Punchline
By PAUL KRASSNER

On May 11, 2007, Mort Sahl turned eighty. He was a pioneer in stand-up comedy. He broke through the tradition of jokes about airplane food, Asian drivers, booze and frigid wives, instead sharing his wit and insights about political hypocrisy, racism, marijuana laws and monogamy. I first met Sahl in 1953 when he was a guest speaker in a course I was taking at the New School for Social Research. I was inspired by his satirical approach to serious issues.
"Every word I do is improvised," he once told me. "I don't rehearse anything. I start it on stage."

In the beginning, though, he would write key words on a rolled-up newspaper, which became his trademark prop. In 1960 he wrote jokes for presidential candidate John Kennedy, and Sahl's picture graced the cover of Time magazine in August during the conventions. When Kennedy was killed in 1963, Sahl endangered his career and was blacklisted as a result of becoming an associate of New Orleans D.A. Jim Garrison in his investigation of the JFK assassination..
Paul Krassner: Mort Sahl's Punchline


"Heeeere's Justice!" 37 years ago this month, Johnny Carson spent 50 minutes with New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison
Sahl is one of my favourite undersung heroes of the Sixties, for having spent the capital of a successful career in the Quixotic pursuit of justice for the murderers of America.

From the cover of Time

to "conspiracy monger"

That strikes me as the trajectory of an honourable man.

There's an interview with Sahl a couple of months later in 1968, before the epochal one-two of Dr King and Robert Kennedy, that is as prophetic as anything I've read from that time:

ARGO: Why is the truth behind the assassination of President Kennedy the last chance of America for its survival?

SAHL: Because the evidence developed by District Attorney Garrison indicates that certain people had to take President Kennedy's life in order to control ours..
Rigorous Intuition: "Heeeere's Justice!"

[Lord Balto]

Thanks for that. I do recall him mentioning Mort Sahl. Sahl was one of my favorite comedians of the time, and I always wondered why he fell from the limelight. I was rather innocent in those days.

I particularly like that astonished little laugh of DiEugenio's. It's like he's saying, "This is too absurd to be true," without actually saying it.

[sunny]

First, this human being was a fucking HERO

So true! The minute I finished On the Trail of the Assassins the first time, I wrote him a letter of appreciation, really a fan letter. His courage was indomitable and nothing anyone could ever tell me about him would change my love and awe of him. He is the epitomy of what an "American Hero" should be.

Thank you for this.

[MinM]

JFK, 9/11 and Conspiracy Theories
"There have been many things swept under the carpet. And I think it's a shame in a government that you trust - I think it's a shame, the things that they chose to tell you and the things they choose not to tell you." -- Sept. 11 widow Julia Sweeney, whose husband Brian worked in the World Trade Center

"One of my greatest shames, as a journalist is that I still don't know who killed Jack Kennedy." -- Hunter S. Thompson

Last January, Mike Ward compared the post-9/11 conspiracy frenzy to what occurred in the aftermath of JFK’s murder. "Angry speculation -- focused mainly on government dirty dealings, ulterior motives, and potential complicity in the attacks -- has risen to a clamor that easily rivals what followed the Kennedy assassination,"

Inconsistencies in the official story always take their toll, particularly when there's a whiff of a cover-up. And certainly, news that the White House will edit sensitive documents before handing them over to the independent commission investigating Sept. 11 makes matters murkier. "The White House gets to cherry-pick how much access the nation's commission looking into 9/11 gets to crucial documents. I'm ready to vote for subpoenas right now," former Senator Max Cleland told CNN, evoking Warren Commission suspicion deja vu.

While it's not surprising, as a New York Times/CBS poll revealed, that 77 percent of Americans reject the Warren Commission's findings, it seems that several government officials did, too. Richard Nixon, for example, said that the Warren Commission was "the greatest hoax that has ever been perpetuated," while Bill Clinton reportedly asked Webster Hubble to find answers to two questions: "One, who killed JFK? And, two, are there UFOs?"

Corporate Media protects their masters

Bill Maher reflected what seems to be prevailing attitude towards JFK and Sept. 11 theories. Uttering a confounded "wow" after Chris Matthews admitted, "I believe in the single bullet theory," Maher nevertheless balked when an audience member suggested that Bush might have purposely dropped the ball on 9/11.

Though the press is meant to be a watchdog for "we the people," since 9/11, it's been clearly complicit in spreading governmental whoppers about everything from WMD to Jessica Lynch. At times, it spoon fed us doozies (remember the one about the hijacker’s passport surviving the fiery crash into the World Trade Center?), while often, it was merely guilty of sins of omission. 'I'm very disappointed in the press," 9/11 widow Kristin Breitweiser told Salon.com. 'I've been scheduled to go on 'Meet the Press' and 'Hardball' so many times and I'm always canceled. Frankly I'd like nothing better than to go head to head with Dick Cheney on 'Meet the Press.' Because somebody needs to ask the questions and I don't understand why nobody is."

This unholy alliance between the media and the government was intact after the JFK assassination, too. Bertrand Russell's 1964 essay, "16 Questions on the Assassination," for example, charged that the American media blindly propagated "blatant fabrications" and largely ignored "world-wide disbelief" in official US government claims. [liNK]

A 1992 Village Voice article entitled "JFK: How the Media Assassinated the Real Story" further chronicled government’s sins and the media’s complicity. In a move that rivals the Bush administration’s manipulation of WMD intelligence, Deputy Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach determined what the Warren Commission's findings should be a year before the commission reached them. "We need something to head off public speculation or Congressional hearings of the wrong sort." Katzenbach wrote in a 1963 memo.

Chronicling ploys to achieve this end, the Voice outlined tactics that are startlingly familiar to the post-9/11 propaganda employed today. "[T]he working press was a lobster in a trap," Bill Moyers admitted. "Back then, what government said was the news." While this phenomenon was recently witnessed whenever anyone like Scott Ritter disputed the official story (Ritter was accused, as Paul Zahn put it, "of drinking Saddam Hussein's Kool-Aid"), such naivete was more forgivable during the pre-Watergate era. Because of this, Johnny Carson's reaction to Jim Garrison's Tonight Show appearancewas hardly out of bounds.

"The function of the Warren Commission was to make the American people feel that the [JFK assassination] had been looked into so that there would be no further inquiries," Garrison told an incredulous Carson.

"I just can't understand how you think that these men think they can get away with it or for what reason they would do it," Carson later responded...

http://www.onlinejournal.org/Special_Re ... 5chin.html
The King of the Nights darkest hour
Johnny Carson and the Kennedy assassination
By Larry Chin

January 28, 2005 Even in glints of light and joy, there is the darkness of unacknowledged realities and suppressed nightmare.

As America mourns the death of late night TV icon Johnny Carson, fondly reminiscing over decades of gags and laughs, few bother recalling the single most telling "Carson moment" there ever was.

On January 31, 1968, New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison appeared on the Tonight Show to discuss his investigation into US government involvement in the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
http://www.prouty.org/garrison/carson1.ram

http://www.prouty.org/garrison/carson2.ram
Over the course of 90 minutes, the smiles and yucks went silent. Carson, Americas chuckling nighttime buddy, everybodys friend, was the assassin. He badgered, belittled, and mocked Garrison, repeatedly interrupting Garrison as he made an impassioned plea to the American people to question the official story of the JFK assassination. When Garrison attempted to show the photograph of the infamous "Three Tramps" (still unidentified mystery men who were arrested behind the Grassy Knoll and marched through Dealey Plaza, likely members of the assassination team), Carson made sure America would not see it. He yanked Garrisons arm aside, and cut the cameras. Garrison later mused:

"Why had I been debriefed in advance so that Carson could be apprised of my likely answers? Why had Carson pulled my arm away so that the photographs were out of camera range? And why had the director and the control room switched the camera so that the photographs could not be seen? The only reasonable, realistic explanation, I found myself concluding, was control.

"Some long-cherished illusions of mine about the great free press in our country underwent a painful reappraisal during this period. The restraint and respect for justice one might expect from the press . . . did not exist".

As noted by Maureen Farrell
http://www.buzzflash.com/farrell/03/11/far03002.html
, the "unholy alliance between the media and the government," in covering up government crimes, was evident that night:

"The function of the Warren Commission was to make the American people feel that the [JFK assassination] had been looked into so that there would be no further inquiries," Garrison told an incredulous Carson. "I just can't understand how you think that these men think they can get away with it or for what reason they would do it," Carson later responded.

By 9:00 the next morning, Garrison had received more than 2,000 telegrams from district attorneys across America, who felt that Carson's "nervous antagonism," was a sign that Garrison was onto something.

Feeling the need to apologize for Carson's demeanor (which was nevertheless polite and jovial by today's shout-fest standards), NBC sent out thousands of form letters saying, "The Johnny seen on TV that night was not the Johnny we all know and love. He had to play the devil's advocate, because that makes for a better program."

Carson was furious about NBCs letter, and promised never to allow Garrison on his program again.

It is no surprise that today, as mainstream corporate media is flooded with "happy" Johnny Carson memories and magnificent tomes about how the charming Carson "epitomized the goodness of middle America", the Garrison interviewthe one glaring moment that exposed Carson as a peevish, patronizing, gatekeeping servant of larger forces continues to be studiously avoided.
Times, and the historical facts, have fully vindicated the late Garrison. Oliver Stone's film JFK, which included an amusing version of the Carson interview (Stone depicted his fictional Garrison protagonist being badgered by an obnoxious talk show host named "Johnny Johnson," played by John Laroquette.)

Here we find something to truly mourn: Johnny Carson, on that night in 1968, had the power to change the world. He chose to use that power to destroy a courageous whistleblower, kill truth, and keep America naïve and stupid.

As one television critic wrote of Carson, "he rode his droll detachment and bemused self-effacement through wars and assassinations, riots and Watergate". But Carson, like many other powerful public figures and Hollywood celebrities, did little to address these serious events, except to provide water cooler humor and lampoons (ultimately giving birth to brain-addling sound-bite entertainment politics, epitomized by Jon Stewart, Jay Lenos Tonight Show, Saturday Night Live, etc.), and worse. There's Johnny.
http://www.onlinejournal.org/Special_Re ... ports.html

[Lord Balto]

There is one basic similarity between the JFK assassination and the events of September 11 that moots all the rest of the inconsistencies and obvious lies. As Prouty points out, by every law and precedent, the Kennedy murder should have been handled by the Dallas Police Dept and the Dallas prosecutor's office. The removal of the body and the shifting of responsibility to the FBI basically destroyed any semblance of normal due process and any pretense of objective accounting for the crime.

In the case of 911, the removal of the rubble, the very evidence of the crime, speaks volumes about the causes and implications of these events.

Also, in both cases, the FBI manages to "solve" the case in a matter of hours, whereas normal crimes take the Bureau months if not years to solve, if they are solved at all. This is evidence of nothing less than preplanned scenarios. Here, again, all other evidence is reduced to the status of a footnote, written after we have already descended into the rabbit hole.

Find the people behind the hijacking of the Kennedy murder case and the destruction of the primary evidence in the 911 case and you will find the names and faces of the culprits.

[slimmouse]

descended into the rabbit hole.

Find the people behind the hijacking of the Kennedy murder case and the destruction of the primary evidence in the 911 case and you will find the names and faces of the culprits.

I for one, would have to lump GHW Bush very firmly within such a venn sector.

The Bush family truly are one of the nasty nasty enigmas of the 20th century.

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

.....
Fifth, and this is what enrages me right now, forgive me...How on fucking earth can a sane or honest person have the gall to claim that a virtually-omnipotent national security apparatus would bother with a so-subtle-as-to-barely-exist tactical advantage of using a television program's name to confuse the future synapses of a tiny subset of children about the mere surname Garrison...but yet at the same time would allow the real Garrison himself an uninterrupted half hour of unsupervised network television exposure to air the foulest of their dirty laundry in a most dignified and persuasive way? There ought never to be again another bullshit claim involving Garrison and keyword hijacking, not that there was ever a reason for one before. Jim Garrison's heroic soul SHITS IN THE MOUTH of the person who would make such a bullshit claim.

So many errors here. Except, yes, Garrison is a hero and all should study him.

But YOU, FB, are presenting a simplistic viewpoint of psyops, not me.

Garrison's blip of a half-hour (REAL TIME, NO VCRs or Tivo, ok?) was a drop in the ocean of psyops tides against him.

The basics of taking command of a story and framing a target were all in play by the time Garrison was given his time slot. The FCC seems to have either been playing into the CIA's forestalling and targeting of Garrison (a counterpropaganda tactic meant to 'get it over with' combined with character assassination) or they may not have been controlled. Because in 1961, Newton Minnow, JFK's new FCC man, reamed the broadcast industry in his famous 'vast wasteland' speech. And the CIA was using that wastland for psyops.

1) The national security apparatus is not "omnipotent." Drop the straw man.
Plus it was a different level of control in 1967 than today, 41 years later.

2) The ILLUSION of balance is an important aspect of perception management.
Remember the PBS disinfo documentary this year called 'Oswald's Ghost?'
Almost all CIA mouthpieces and lies but it included some comments from THE iconic Dealey Plaza truth-teller, Mark Lane.
Gee, FB, why would a CIA disinfo film do that?

3) Garrison was highly visible all the time after the CIA went and announced to the world that he was preparing to charge someone in the murder of the president.
Ok? The CIA announced this to put Garrison on the defensive and get right to negatively framing him as a way to cap the simmering disbelief in the Warren Commission report and the stream of investigative books.
So Garrison's inevitable visibility was used to discredit him in every way possible to turn him into a poster boy for 'politically-ambitious paranoid conspiracy kook.'

JUST LIKE OLIVER STONE.
This is basic spookcraft - turning liabilities into assets, or trying to, anyway.

4) Children don't watch the news. And only so many adults do.
And inoculating children against the dangerous stuff that might be mentioned at the adult's table is standard operating procedure and critical to national security.
Hence ABC television putting on 'Garrison's Gorilla's' (men with guns, criminals fighting on 'our side' ala 'The Dirty Dozen') from 1967-68.
Notice the mirrors. Notice the negative framing of "gorilla."
Coincidence theorists can go marvel at the 'associative universe.' Ahem.

5) You obviously have no idea how many mnemonic decoys of Dealey Plaza have been cranked out since that day. Scores and scores of movies and television shows which you have no knowledge of. Vast sums of money and brainpower going into diluting that meme in cultural memory. Every name and semantic chunk of the cover story and the whistleblower's stories has been processed in idealized entertainment narratives.

And, FB, quit being so vulgar and hostile. I've been carrying the Garrison and Mark Lane flag in ways you'll seemingly never understand. Until you buy my book and DVD and video game.

[Lord Balto]

descended into the rabbit hole.

Find the people behind the hijacking of the Kennedy murder case and the destruction of the primary evidence in the 911 case and you will find the names and faces of the culprits.

I for one, would have to lump GHW Bush very firmly within such a venn sector.

The Bush family truly are one of the nasty nasty enigmas of the 20th century.

Is it true that GHWB was in Dallas on November 22?

[Eldritch]

As I understand it, Bush has said he "can't remember" exactly where he was when JFK was murdered.

If true, then George H. W. Bush is one of the few American adults living on November 22, 1963, who can't remember—exactly—where they were at that moment, on that day.

[Lord Balto]

The interesting thing about the suggestion that GHWB was in Dallas is the parallel it draws to his son (and his cousins) and 911. Could it be this family just has a genetic predisposition to be at the scene of world-changing crimes? I didn't think so....

[orz]

There ought never to be again another bullshit claim involving Garrison and keyword hijacking,

There ought never to be again another HMW post.

[slimmouse]

As I understand it, Bush has said he "can't remember" exactly where he was when JFK was murdered.

If true, then George H. W. Bush is one of the few American adults living on November 22, 1963, who can't remember—exactly—where they were at that moment, on that day.

I think that the above says enough really.

Its one of those "Not acceptable- as - proof- in- a -court- of- law things"

A bit like how the towers were blown to fuck is not really provable in a court of law. You know the shit.

Its also one of those "Fuck humanity/decency/justice right up the ass" statements.

Its a Bushism, which encapsulates the Reptillian mindset of those who are telling us how its gonna be.