Whose idea was it to put Allen Dulles on the Warren Commission? Robert Kennedy's. [View all]

[Bolo Boffin]

I did not know that until today. Before now on DU, all I hear is how Dulles' presence on the Commission guarantees that the fix was in, but I never hear about Bobby being the one to put Dulles on the Commission. That sheds a whole different light on the situation, doesn't it?

Source? This fantastic article from Skeptic Magazine (pdf):

http://www.skeptic.com/downloads/JFK-Conspiracy-Theories-at-50.pdf

The footnote for this information is as follows:

Holland, (Max,) 2004. The Kennedy Assassination Tapes: The White House Conversations of Lyndon B. Johnson regarding the Assassination, the Warren Commission, and the Aftermath. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 120. See also Russo, Gus. 1998. Live by the Sword: The Secret War against Castro and the Death of JFK. Baltimore: Bancroft, 362.

So Robert Kennedy is on tape suggesting to Johnson that Dulles be a part of the Warren Commission.

For the record, I do not believe that Robert Kennedy was an accessory before or after the fact to his brother's murder. Indeed, I find any suggestion that he was to be a clear mark that someone has wandered too far into Crazytown. And yet, for those who cannot seem to post here at DU about Kennedy's assassination without trumpeting Dulles as a boogyman, I do not see how these posters can escape the conclusion that Robert Kennedy, at the very least, conspired with Dulles to do what JFK conspiracy advocates claim Dulles did - hide a CIA plot to kill Kennedy from the Commission.

Indeed, I learned that JFK conspiracy advocates will go so far as to accuse Robert Kennedy in so many words from an article posted several times here at DU:

http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_issues/27th_Issue/schotz.html

THE ROLE OF ROBERT F. KENNEDY

It is at this point that we can begin to look at the role of the "critical community" in this process, but before I do this I want to examine the role of Robert F. Kennedy.

When I have tried to point out to people that Robert F. Kennedy, in cooperating with the cover-up, became in every sense of the word an accessory after the fact in his own brother's murder, there has generally been an instant recoil. But I want to tell you., that this is not an opinion; this is just a fact. There is no way we can deny this, if we think about it. I'm not talking about why he became an accessory, but the fact that he did is absolutely undeniable. Robert F. Kennedy had a legal sworn obligation to seek out the assassins, and in failing to do so he joined the criminal act of conspiracy with the criminal act of cover-up and sealed the deal. And don't let anyone tell you that it was because he couldn't put two words together after his brother was murdered. I have seen his correspondence with Ray Marcus. And if it were some kind of personal emotional reaction, how is it that none of the people surrounding Robert Kennedy could utter the obvious truth of the assassination? No, Robert Kennedy's cooperation, agonizing and humiliating as it must have been for him, was dictated by political considerations, which led him away from his legal and moral obligation to tell the American people what he knew.

When I start talking to people about this, I hear Robert Kennedy's actions defended with the idea that if he had spoken out he would have been marginalized. And this is important, because maybe that was part of Robert Kennedy's motivation. But I think the person who responds to me in this way is telling me something about his or her own motivation. The person is telling me that in their opinion, the desire not to be marginalized can somehow justify Iying to the public about what you do and don't know about the assassination of the President. I want to say in no uncertain terms this Iying is not only profoundly lacking in morality but is in addition profoundly foolish and is totally indefensible. It was indefensible for Robert Kennedy and it is indefensible for any one of us.

There is no justification whatsoever for lying to anyone about what you do and don't know about this murder. Quite to the contrary, if telling the truth marginalizes you, then that is the place to be. After all, if enough people are willing to be marginalized, then before you know it, society has developed a different center. This is the politics of truth. But Robert Kennedy wasn't really used to the politics of truth. Instead, he was captivated by the illusory politics of power, influence and access. And I am afraid that many of us are also caught up with such ideas.

Much more at that link excoriating the memory of Robert Kennedy. At long last, my fellow DU members, is there no decency?