Two items for the JFK agenda in 2014

In my remarks to the JFK Lancer, I talked about what could be done in 2014 to clarify the story of JFK’s assassination. I proposed two types of action: one legal, one historical.

It’s time to act on these.

Legal strategy

I said:

“We need a sustained and focused attack on the secrecy system that denies the people their history. In my lawsuit Morley v. CIA, my attorney, my counselor, my friend Jim Lesar has shown what one man, alone and unaided, can do. We need more Jim Lesars. We need to conceive and execute an ambitious legal strategy that aims to liberate the remains secret records of the JFK assassination–in the next year.”

I’m going to announce another initiative in this area in the coming weeks. Stay tuned.

A civil society response to the Warren Commission

More importantly, we need to replace the cacophony of conspiracy theories with a core account of what has been learned since the publication of the Warren Commission Report.

At Lancer I said:

“We need to come together with a single coherent alternative to the official theory that most people doubt for good reason. We need, I think, a civil society response to the Warren Commission. We need another report on the assassination of the president, not one compiled by four lawyers working at the mercy of the FBI and the CIA and the White House, but by civil society.

“We need a crowd-sourced, data-mined, fact-checked, downloadable, account of how and why President Kennedy was killed and we need to be able to publish it on multiple platforms, free of charge, on September 30, 2014.”

So what do we do?

The way to begin compiling such response in the 21st century is to create a wiki.  Other people have had the idea like the people at Wikispooks, but as I noted last week. I think their approach is marred by the presumption that anybody who disagrees is mentally retarded or criminally complicit. I think we need a more inclusive approach that does not demonize people who have other opinions or who are undecided.

This wiki would be an open to all, curated by a diverse panel of experts, and dedicated to writing as complete an account of the assassination that could serve as an alternative to the account given in Wikipedia.

Help Wanted

This is a big job that requires a group effort. So I’m looking for people who are willing to volunteer their time to make it happen.

We need a steering committee that could take on the job of setting up and curating the Wiki.

If you want to participate, drop me a line here.

We need technical advice from Web-savvy people about what wiki software to use. There are many choices and I’m not competent to decide which would work best for our purpose.

Here are some of the choices in wiki platforms.

If you have technical skills and can help, drop me a line here.

 

5 comments

  1. John Kirsch says:

    These sound like good ideas. I have a couple questions. Could you clarify what you mean by a “core account of what has been learned since the publication of the Warren Commission Report.”
    Also, who would be in charge of assembling the civil society response to the WC and who would do the fact checking?

  2. Jonathan says:

    Jeff,

    I tried to send this to you at info@jfkfact.org, but my message was rejected:

    Hi, Jeff.

    I want to help with your project. Possibly I can help with curating the wiki.

    My pertinent professional skills are in the law and in technical writing. I have about 25 articles published in peer-reviewed journals; write a newsletter for professionals in my field; and have written or co-authored various books and reference materials in my field.

    I’m an amateur JFK researcher, but I’ve studied a lot of both secondary and primary source material related to the assassination.

    My orientation toward the case is, I believe, basically the same as yours. I have no specific theory and want facts. I believe in open, robust debate; but am concerned about the use of language. I object, for example, to the use of the word “evidence” to describe any of the record in the JFK case. Evidence is a word loaded with legal meaning. Unless everyone using the term agrees to that meaning, the word becomes a loose cannon. I also object to “factoid” (insufficient definition), “conspiracy theory” and “lone nutter” (demeaning terms).

    Let me know.

    Thanks.

  3. Hans Trayne says:

    Jeff, I believe a frequent YouTube video contributor acting as you & your website’s ‘Town Crier’ could help you get the word about your efforts out around the globe quickly. The videos could be short slideshow type that includes snippets of real video & audio that would not require a lot of time to upload to YouTube nor construct. The ‘Week In Review’ parody videos that The Onion posts on its website weekly resembles what I visualize (minus the parody & comedy). Similar to Len Osanic’s ’50 Reasons’ video series but not as long or elaborate. Contributions could be uploaded to YouTube & held in private status awaiting your approval & necessary corrections before making the videos public.

    One issue I don’t feel the public understands is the sheer volume of its history being withheld. I have read that it encompasses millions of pages of material & may include visuals & other non-word records.

    What do you think? The links/passwords to videos held in ‘private’ status would require you receiving them & approving of the material prior to releasing the video presentation as viral.

    • Hans Trayne says:

      Some afterthoughts about my suggestion:

      1. Nothing grabs males attention like an attractive diva; perhaps Alex Jones might lend out Lee Ann McAdoo for some brief headline video spots?

      2. Videos can come from more than one contributor if desired (assuming Jeff Morley doesn’t produce his own presentations solo)& cover any topic Jeff Morley & his staff desire. Jeff may want to include portions of his interviews or webcasts. Contributors would need to be flexible & prepared to follow his instructions. A intro & outro logo repeated on subsequent weekly, monthly or daily update videos would look professional.

      3. A channel for these videos would need to be created for JFK Facts at YouTube. Jeff Morley may want the login & password for that channel in order to access it, make changes, upload his own videos or delete anything he wants to omit.

      4. Persons in a position of authority that have influence over the release of the millions of pages of withheld JFK history can view what Jeff Morley & his readers feel about it by simply clicking on one of his videos & following the direction to his website.

      Anyone who happens to see just 1 video presentation is another potential visitor to his website. That person probably has friends to recommend Jeff’s site to. Some people practically exist to watch YouTube videos and rarely visit any websites of any subject. Those are the folks who need to know about Jeff Morley the most.

  4. PBR says:

    Hi Jeff. Although not technically savvy I would certainly contribute through research to this monumental effort. My interest in the case was inspired by a meeting with a member of the Garda Síochana, the Irish police, who was in the Kennedy detail during the President’s visit to Ireland in the summer of 1963. I subsequently wrote an article about said bodyguard and fellow Irishman William Greer for publication in the local press here in Ireland. I am an amateur researcher of the case with a Masters in Politics and would be only too willing to weigh in. My only fear is that the narrative on the wiki may fall foul to competing theoretical analyses to such an extent that consensus will be difficult regarding agreed conclusions on the myriad aspects of the case. I wholeheartedly agree with your admonition that critics of the official narrative must strive for said consensus and refrain from infighting. This will be a most trying challenge requiring intellectual selflessness and a dogged, impartial quest for empirical fact. Bringing a European perspective to the case I believe that I can also inject a certain detachment which may be of value. The downside is that I rely entirely on the internet for my research. Nonetheless It’s a fascinating prospect and I will help out as directed or required.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

In seeking to expand the range of informed debate about the events of 1963 and its aftermath, JFKFacts.org welcomes comments that are factual, engaging, and civil. more