3 ‘Conspiracy Theorists’ Departed 50 Years Ago Today: Aldous Huxley, C.S. Lewis & John F. Kennedy

By: Arlen Williams
Gulag Bound

From a Nov. 22, 2013 article by Daniel Hannan in The Telegraph

From a Nov. 22, 2013 article by Daniel Hannan in The Telegraph

In the order of their births:

  • Aldous Huxley (July 26, 1894 – November 22, 1963)
  • C.S. Lewis (November 29, 1898 – November 22, 1963)
  • John F. Kennedy (May 29, 1917 – November 22, 1963)

Each of these three men made an extraordinary mark on Planet Earth, the world of men, an impression felt even now in our brave new world, far from Camelot, farther still from Aslan’s realm. Rather than going quietly into the night, each shined his own manner of light into our time, half a century later. And each warned us of threats to our natural rights by the order of natural law, menaces which we should be acutely feeling.

Rather than attempting three biographies, essays, or eulogies, offered are thee sets of links and video, with but a few comments.

In the Brave New World he foresaw, Huxley warned us of the impositions of a coming technocratic age, its tyrannies wrought by those who would seek its inventions as means of power to control the flows and currents of society. We are now in that age up to knees tempted to buckle in its waves. He warned us, even a society built of grand schemes is always just you and me, what we may do, and what may be done to us. (Biographics)

Huxley interviewed by Mike Wallas, 1958

The Ultimate Revolution | by Aldous Huxley
(caption at YouTube copied below)

Uploaded on Aug 16, 2010

Aldous Huxley author of Brave New World speaking at U.C. Berkeley in 1962. Aldous Huxley uses this speaking opportunity to outline his vision for the ‘ultimate revolution’, a scientific dictatorship where people will be conditioned to enjoy their servitude, and will pose little opposition to the ‘ruling oligarchy’, as he puts it. He also takes a moment to compare his book, “Brave New World,” to George Orwell’s “1984” and considers the technique in the latter too outdated for actual implementation.

“There will be, in the next generation or so, a pharmacological method of making people love their servitude, and producing dictatorship without tears, so to speak, producing a kind of painless concentration camp for entire societies, so that people will in fact have their liberties taken away from them, but will rather enjoy it, because they will be distracted from any desire to rebel by propaganda or brainwashing, or brainwashing enhanced by pharmacological methods. And this seems to be the final revolution.” — Aldous Huxley, Tavistock Group, California Medical School, 1961

Reminds me, I need to take the six gallon containers and get a new round of spring water. I don’t drink the stuff with the Rockefellerian smattering of sodium fluoride in it. (Hitler put fluoride in the water for his concentration camp victims, to make them docile.) But there are more kinds of “drugs” in our society than those chemical.

Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World,” BBC television 1980


Lewis, a Cambridge professor in linguistics, wrote captivating and endearing works of fiction for adults and children. And, he was an insightful and incisive force in Christian literature, perhaps reaching the furthest into truth and drawing it out for the most, of any in his time and to this day. But he also followed up Huxley by demonstrating the subversiveness of those who would achieve such a technocracy as he had described.

The desires of elitists that have become shown in the last few years, in technocracy and transhumanism call to mind the third of Lewis’ “space trilogy” novels, That Hideous Strength. In it, he exposed the demonic evil behind those who would not only master the workings of nature in order to fulfill the normal ambitions of rationalist-materialist elitists, but who would transform nature itself, to extend their human capacities beyond human limitations. He mused that such violation might incur the wrath of nature and nature’s God, mercifully so, if it does.

A few more reflections on the book from one of his many readers:

C.S. Lewis on Transhumanism (Illuminati Philosophy)

Today, Clive Staples “Jack” Lewis was to be honored in Westminster Abbey’s renowned “Poets’ Corner,” though he has received vastly greater honors than that, now come to some fruition in the last fifty earthly years.

C.S. Lewis shares ‘Why I’m Not an Atheist’

This is man of both common sense and transcendent wisdom, and surpassingly gifted in the means to convey these, whether his subject matter were the arts and letters, the humanities, or that which both lays beyond their edges and infuses them with life and light, within. Here are his reflections about virtuous and workable politics: “Get Acquainted with C.S. Lewis’ Thoughts of God & Government.”

C. S. Lewis: Why He Matters Today from Gregory Bandy on Vimeo.

(Lewis biographics)


Even more people believe they are familiar with John F. Kennedy, with some good, some bad, a Democratic president of personal morals familiar to that party, but with political principles which have been essentially purged out of it, by its systematically dominating neo-Marxists. They were remaining shades of detectable patriotism in an overall set of views which might be said to have yet been American.

Here is how he spoke as an American about conspiracy, to an assembly of another kind of American being purged of it’s American nature, journalists. Much has been read into this speech and much has been misconstrued. It is clear that he was speaking of Soviet Communism, and of news censorship in America, yet it is clear he was speaking of the matter on broader terms and that he referred to secret societies in the plural. Especially with his privileged upbringing, much of it in London, he may have been familiar with a greater coordination of conspiracies, one which has included the ideological, procedural, and financial feeding of the two massive tentacles of Russian and Chinese communists, in a hideously strong communal organism of quietly intermingled goals, objectives, plans and executions.

Kennedy Speech Conspiracy Secret Societies


Note: there rumors about John F. Kennedy that purport such things as that seven days before his death he announced he intended to reveal the conspiracy behind the Federal Reserve. That has been debunked, though the basic, operational facts of that grievous conspiracy are hardly hidden.


The Council Has Spoken!! This Weeks’ Watcher’s Council Results – 11/22/13

The Watcher’s Council

Harry Reid Invokes the Nuclear Option Destroying The Senate Filibuster Rule

Once again, the Council has spoken, the votes have been cast and we have the results for this week’s Watcher’s Council match-up.

You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time. – Abraham Lincoln

There’s a sucker born every minute, and some of them are twins – P.T. Barnum

These are rare, valuable magic beans, I say! – from “Jack In The Beanstalk”

This week’s winner, Joshuapundit’s Roundup – ObamaCare’s Epic Fail, is my roundup and analysis of the continued unfolding of the ObamaCare debacle and the president’s ‘fix,’ undoubtedly the biggest and most expensive scam ever foisted on the American public. Here’s a slice:

This gets funnier and funnier the longer it goes.

After the president’s pathetic performance last week, the blowback is almost sit-com worthy.

As you now know, what the president actually said yesterday is that he’s not giving individuals the same delay he gave corporations or the same subsidies and waivers he gave congress and certain favored corporations and government bureaucracies, he’s merely prepared to wink and look the other way and indulge in what he called ‘selective enforcement’ …and just until after the 2014 midterms.

The president is trying to pretend that insurance companies are free to offer the old policies, but, they aren’t. And aside from the financial impact and the bureaucratic snafu involved in turning the clock back, they don’t wish to break the law…which has not been repealed. What President Obama is hoping is that the anger of the low information voters will be directed on to the insurance companies and that people will still be forced into the expensive, hidden-subsidy exchanges. After which, he can say ‘hey it isn’t my fault.’ That’s his thinking, but I have doubts it will fly. Three years ago, maybe but not now.

The insurance companies were, to be polite about it, not exactly pleased. They spent millions of dollars complying with ObamaCare, antagonized a number of their customers and now the Prevaricator-in-Chief expects them spend millions more to rewrite and recreate insurance plans that no longer exist and are still illegal policies under the law and expose themselves to litigation! Given this president’s credibility and his tendency to change his mind depending on which way the wind is blowing, they’d be fools to trust his word and expose themselves legally.

Only an arrogant and not particularly bright you know what would expect that.And the industry is reacting as you might expect. Chris Wallace read this statement from the trade association of American insurance companies:

Changing the rules after health plans have already met the requirements of the law, Obamacare, could destabilize the market and result in higher premiums for consumers. Premiums have already been set for next year, based on assumptions of when consumers will be transitioning to the marketplaces.

If now fewer younger and healthier people choose to purchase health coverage in the exchanges, premiums will increase, and there will be fewer choices for consumers.

And the state insurance commissioners aren’t thrilled either:

“For three years, state insurance regulators have been working to adapt to the Affordable Care Act in a way that best meets the needs of consumers in each state,” the National Association of Insurance Commissioners said in a statement. “It is unclear how, as a practical matter, the changes proposed … by the president can be put into effect.”

Thus far, the insurance commissioners of Washington state, D.C., Arkansas, and Vermont, all Democrats, have rejected Obama’s attempt to gut the exchanges with his ‘fix’.

More at the link.

In our non-Council category, the winner was the one and only Mark Steyn with Thus Spake Obama, submitted by The Noisy Room. It’s hard to top Mr. Steyn when he’s on top of his game and he certainly is here, commenting on the President’s latest attempt to rule by diktat. Do read it.

Okay, here are this week’s full results. Only Bookworm Room was unable to vote this week, but was not subject to the normal 2/3 vote penalty:

Council Winners

Non-Council Winners

See you next week! Don’t forget to tune in on Monday AM for this week’s Watcher’s Forum, as the Council and their invited special guests take apart one of the provocative issues of the day with short takes and weigh in… don’t you dare miss it. And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter… ’cause we’re cool like that!


PBS Whitewashes Oswald’s KGB Connections

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

In its nearly two-hour documentary on the Kennedy assassination, “Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?,” public television actually interviewed three former Soviet KGB officers who acknowledged contact with the assassin Oswald. But these communist intelligence operatives insisted they did not encourage Oswald’s plot to kill the American president.

Russian President Vladmir Putin, a former KGB officer, must have been pleased with their performance.

In this case, the taxpayer-supported Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) and its Frontline series failed to provide the “definitive investigation of the mysterious life and character of Lee Harvey Oswald.”

It may have been a mystery at one time, but not 50 years later.

The fingerprints of the Soviet intelligence service and its Cuban affiliate are all over Oswald.

One of the main controversies covered superficially in the program was Oswald’s trip to Mexico City—a favorite place for foreign communist governments to contact communist agents living in the U.S.

PBS claimed that Oswald visited the Soviet and Cuban embassies looking for a visa, but was rebuffed by communist officials. It said, “…in the end both the Russians and the Cubans rejected him. All his plans to fight for Castro and return to Russia had come to nothing. He had nowhere to go but back to America.”

Needless to say, taking the KGB’s word on such a grave matter is not responsible journalism. In fact, it is downright laughable.

One of the KGB officers interviewed by PBS was Valery Kostikov, an espionage agent connected to political assassinations. He was used to make the point that the CIA had misled American investigators about Oswald’s alleged meeting at the Soviet embassy.

Fifty years after the fact, our media are still covering up the conspiracy to kill Kennedy based in Moscow and Havana. Kennedy was an enemy because he was a dedicated anti-communist who wanted to overthrow Cuban dictator Fidel Castro and stop communism’s advance in the Western hemisphere.

For some strange reason, PBS decided to take the word of former officers of the KGB.

A better source would have been Lt. Gen. Ion Mihai Pacepa’s book, Programmed to Kill: Moscow’s Responsibility for Lee Harvey Oswald’s Assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy. It examines in detail the KGB’s disinformation Operation Dragon to “throw the blame on various elements in the United States for killing their own president.”

Over the years, the Soviets have successfully confused many people about their role, blaming the CIA, the Mafia, the right-wing, Texas oil men, or Lyndon Johnson.

One of the lies was that Oswald went to the Soviet embassy in Mexico City to get a Russian visa so that he could then travel to Cuba. In fact, Pacepa says, Oswald met with Kostikov outside the embassy, in order to discuss Kennedy’s murder.

The PBS program documented many of Oswald’s communist connections, including his membership in the pro-Castro Fair Play for Cuba Committee, and his defection to Soviet Russia and return to the U.S. However, it whitewashed the nature of his ongoing relationship with the Soviet KGB.

In an interview with Accuracy in Media, Pacepa, the highest ranking defector ever from the Soviet-bloc, discussed media coverage of the anniversary of the Kennedy assassination, including a controversial CNN column by University of Virginia political scientist Larry J. Sabato casting aspersions on the conduct of the CIA and FBI.

Pacepa told Accuracy in Media, “Larry Sabato does not know anything about this crime of the century, which sent the whole country into profound shock, but he accuses various American authorities of lying about it without having any evidence they really lied. Thousands of other people without any sort of expertise joined this party of lying, each viewing events from his own narrow perspective, and each accusing the U.S. government of deceiving its people.”

Sabato wondered what Oswald was doing in Mexico City just before the assassination. He wrote, “It would also be useful to know what really happened when Oswald visited the Cuban and Soviet embassies in Mexico City just two months before the assassination.”

PBS tried to explain these meetings through interviews with former Cuban and Soviet officials. They insisted Oswald merely wanted to discuss a trip to Cuba.

PBS claimed Oswald was told by Cuban officials that “he could only enter Cuba on a temporary visa and only if he was in transit to Russia,” so he “walked the short distance to the Soviet diplomatic compound.”

The program added, “At the Soviet embassy, he [Oswald] met with three consular officials. In fact, all three were KGB officers working under diplomatic cover. In this, their first interview, they recall that Oswald’s hands were shaking and his behavior was erratic.”

“Oswald was told it would take several months to get a Soviet visa, but without one, he would be unable to go to Cuba. Oswald took the news badly,” PBS reported.

Oleg M. Nechiporenko was also featured in the PBS program as another KGB official who wanted nothing to do with Oswald. He wrote the book, Passport to Assassination: the Never-Before-Told Story of Lee Harvey Oswald by the KGB Colonel Who Knew Him, another element of Operation Dragon.

PBS said, “As he left the embassy, Oswald should have been observed by CIA operatives. From houses across the street, the CIA was maintaining non-stop photo surveillance on the Russians and Cubans. Yet the CIA claimed it failed to take one single photograph of Oswald.”

This may be because Oswald did not meet the KGB at the embassy. Pacepa says the Soviets promoted the report that Oswald went to the Soviet embassy in Mexico City to cover his “iron meeting” outside the embassy with Kostikov.

Pacepa explains, “Documents obtained by the Warren Commission prove that during that trip to Mexico City Oswald met a Soviet diplomat, but the meeting was secret, outside of the Embassy. The problem is that, in order to understand those documents, one should be familiar with the KGB super-secret technique of the ‘iron meeting,’ a standard intelligence procedure for emergency situations, with ‘iron’ meaning ironclad or invariable.”

That “diplomat” was in fact Kostikov, an officer of the KGB’s department for assassinations abroad, who was assigned under diplomatic cover to the Soviet embassy in Mexico City.

Pacepa says the facts about the meeting were found in various effects left behind in the garage of Ruth Paine, an American at whose house Oswald spent a critical weekend. A photocopy of a letter Oswald sent to the Soviet embassy was recovered by the Warren Commission and referred to “Comrade Kostin.”

Pacepa comments, “The fact that Oswald used an operational codename for Kostikov confirms that both his meeting with Kostikov in Mexico City and his correspondence with the Soviet Embassy in Washington were conducted in a KGB operational context. The fact that Oswald did not use his real name to obtain his Mexican travel permit confirms this conclusion.”

Pacepa notes that a Mexico City guide book and a Spanish-English dictionary were found among Oswald’s effects after the assassination. The guide book included the Soviet embassy’s telephone number underlined in pencil, the names “Kosten” and “Osvald” noted in Cyrillic on the page listing “Diplomats in Mexico,” and check marks next to five movie theaters on the previous page. Oswald wrote on the back of his Spanish-English dictionary, “buy tickets for bull fight,” and the Plaza México bullring is encircled on his Mexico City map. Also marked on Oswald’s map is the Palace of Fine Arts, a favorite place for tourists to assemble on Sunday mornings to watch the Ballet Folklórico.

Pacepa told AIM these facts strongly suggest that Oswald resorted to an unscheduled or “iron meeting” for an urgent talk with Kostikov in Mexico City. Summarizing the evidence of the meeting, he says a brief encounter was held at a movie house to arrange a meeting for the following day at the bullfights, a brief encounter took place in front of the Palace of Fine Arts to pass Kostikov one of the bullfight tickets Oswald had bought, and a long meeting was held at the Sunday bullfight.

“We cannot be sure that everything happened exactly that way—every case officer has his own quirks,” Pacepa says. “But it is clear that Kostikov and Oswald did secretly meet over that weekend of September 28-29, 1963. The letter to the Soviet embassy that Oswald worked so hard on irrefutably proves that.”

This is not to say that the U.S. Government did not engage in a cover-up. Pacepa says the purpose of the Warren Commission, named after its chairman, Chief Justice Earl Warren, was not to investigate the assassination, but rather to invoke the integrity and long experience of its distinguished members in issuing a report designed to calm the populace and dispel all rumors of “foreign complications” stemming from Oswald’s known connections with the Soviet Union and Cuba.

This was confirmed by former FBI agent Herman Bly, who reviewed CIA files on the assassination, including evidence of Oswald’s meeting with Kostikov, and wrote, “…I believe the heads of the FBI, CIA, and President Johnson wanted the Oswald case brought to a conclusion as fast as possible as they did not want another crisis with the Soviet Union so soon after the Cuban missile crisis.”

“Sadly,” Pacepa says, “we are now commemorating 50 years since the killing of a widely admired American president. Let’s hope that all those who are still trying to make a name for themselves by building fantasies around this national drama will stop. It is time for the truth, not for more fantasy books.”

Former ABC newsman Sam Donaldson, appearing on ABC’s “This Week” in 2009, said about the murder of JFK: “In his dying breath I’d like to be at [Castro’s] bedside and say, did you do it? Meaning November 22, 1963.” After some co-panelists expressed surprise at this statement, Donaldson responded, “Wait a moment. I think it is still open.”

Actually, the case is closed. The communists killed Kennedy. But because of the media’s love affair with Castro, as I point out in this column, liberal reporters can’t bring themselves to admit the truth. It is a triumph of bias over facts and evidence that leaves many people still in the dark about the murder of an American president.

Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism and can be contacted at [email protected]. View the complete archives from Cliff Kincaid.