Here we go again. Noted JFK researcher and co-founder of the Coalition on Political Assassinations (COPA), John Judge, is interviewed by mainstream journalist Molly Redden. Redden does a lot of work for New Republic but this article, Stirring the Plot, appears on the Washington City (DC) Paper's website. The only redeeming part of the article is mentioning Judge's work on his project to found the Museum of Hidden History. The rest is an attempt to re-image John Judge as a coo-coo while the writer interjects her assumptions of the man's character and doubts regarding his work.
And herein lies the problem we have presenting our information to these mainstream writers. They all view conspiracy as kooky and the prevailers of it as kooks as well. That is usually the focus. What the person has to say about the anomalies and contradictions in official (i.e., government) accounts of events is downplayed or ignored. This is the underlying theme of an article such as this. What John Judge has uncovered factually, is never covered. Hence the title, clever but tongue-in-cheek, to set the pace for what is to follow.
Unfortunately, it doesn't help matters much to show a picture of John Judge looking completely demented. The writer remarks Judge resembles a "slightly worse-for-wear Santa Claus" because of his white hair and so-called "scraggly" beard, which I failed to see in the accompanying photo. Anyway, the tone is set.
Redden's article has an awkward vibe to it. It is as if she really doesn't want to go anywhere near this subject but presses on regardless. The pull-off comes when she dangles the carrot and then pulls it back. For example, Redden says the following about John Judge: "Judge bridges the pseudo and scholastic ends of the alt-history world..." And then counters that with a quick follow-up, "at least, that is how he would like to be seen..." As if she just can't quite come around to giving John his due for his years of laboring to uncover the truth. So is he a connecting pathway between these diverse schools of thought or not? The reader is left with a subtle...no.
These mainstream writers like Redden know how radioactive conspiracy thought is and how damaging it could be to a journalist's reputation to trek down that particular rabbit trail. It's just not cool. (Oh, it's cool if Hillary Clinton alleges a "vast rightwing conspiracy." Who ever called her a conspiracy theorist?) These people act as if the Abraham Lincoln assassination is the only conspiracy ever to happen. That is, when they actually make reference to it, which is rare. It was, after all, proof of conspiracy, that much maligned thing. The hint of cowardice permeates writing such as this. But it also keeps the herd-journalists in line.
Not done, Redden soldiers on. "But as a well-known figure in his field, Judge has an appropriately bizarre paper trail." The bizarre paper trail she alludes to involves the idea that George Bush knew the outcome of the 2000 election; that the CIA was involved with the Jonestown Massacre; that Judge's 9-11 research for Rep. Cynthia McKinney featured prior knowledge by George Bush of the attacks. I'll admit this stuff is way out there and I don't cater to it. But I doubt it's all that bizarre. Outlandish would be to say that Oswald was a Federal time travel assassin. There are weirder beliefs than this in circulation. I guess the single bullet theory is perfectly logical? Anyway, it's presented to make sure her readers know that John Judge is just a little off. Or for uncritical thinkers of government issued claptrap, like Redden, way off.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Conspiracy is not a theory–it's a crime. And people are indicted and convicted of it quite regularly. As it says in the book of Proverbs, the wicked despise the righteous. Cain conspired to kill Able. It's something bad people do–they plot. As far as government conspiracies go they happen throughout recorded human history. The classic inside job was when Caesar let his guard down and the Roman Senators stabbed him to death. We have a mindset that we are so civilized that something like that doesn't happen here. Many view the government as benevolent, having our best interest in mind. Well, they didn't have our best interest when they established the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. This was a conspiracy by the bankers to finally establish a central bank on our shores to be in league with their European Brothers. And they succeeded with this poke in the eye to Thomas Jefferson
Finally, Molly Redden has the effrontery to suggest at the end of her article that considering Judge's background in conspiracy research his museum might not be very educational. As if she would know. With the wealth of government documents from numerous sources on a variety of events and controversies in American history, how could Judge's archive not be place of learning? This is a writer maintaining her distaste for the person she is writing about.
There is history and there is what really happens. I've said that before too. Only a select few have access to the truth. It's gotten deeper after the establishment of the Nation Security Act of 1947. Harry Truman signed it into law and it was his stated regret for having done so. Most of our current history is now concealed, locked in dark recesses and what we are told is either hard to swallow or based on multiple false leads. And the truth? An ongoing struggle by a few who in the end, only get a peep.
Addendum #1
Also mentioned in the piece is the phrase “deep history.” Both it and “deep politics” were coined by noted researcher and author Peter Dale Scott. His book Deep Politics and the Death of JFK explores the deep political undercurrents surrounding the Kennedy assassination.
Addendum #2
Molly Redden implies that Rep. Cynthia McKinney spoke before the 9/11 Commission. Actually, she didn’t. She served as a commissioner to The Citizens' Commission on 9-11, a watchdog group keeping tabs on the work of the 9/11 Commission. Redden states that McKinney “famously told the commission that Bush may have known about the impending attacks.” This statement was not made in front of the 9/11 Commission. There is also the implication that John Judge is somehow tainted by McKinney’s remark. Hardly. He’s just supplying her with research data.
Addendum #3
For more on CIA involvement with the Jonestown tragedy, check out Judge’s “The Black Hole of Guyana”. https://ratical.org/ratville/JFK/JohnJudge/Jonestown.html
Sources
Stirring the Plot, Molly Redden
http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/articles/43149/stirring-the-plot/
Writings of John Judge
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/JohnJudge/
COPA
www.politicalassassinations.com
