Santa Barbara conference highlights JFK as ‘national security event’

On 22 November 2013, the Oswald Innocence Campaign will be hosting the premiere event to commemorate the 50th observance of the JFK assassination in Santa Barbara, Calif. The hosts say “they will be presenting cutting-edge research on the death of our 35th President, which holds the keys to understanding what took place.”

They use a line that I like a lot: They say JFK’s assassination was “a national security event.”

Highlights of the conference include:

Phillip Nelson indicts LBJ for the murder of JFK. I’ve been less skeptical about this theory, thanks to Roger Stone. I see JFK’s assassination more as the result of a “national security event” than a plot of domestic ambition but the more you learn about the LBJ, the more you can’t help but wonder.

John Hankey is going to talk about George H.W. Bush in Dealey Plaza.

Personally, I’m skeptical of the evidence presented so far that Bush was there, much less directing the shooters. The science of matching faces from photographs is not a science at all but more of guessing game. Its evidentiary value is low. I know of no other evidence that George H.W. Bush was in the crowd that day.

You would think somebody would have recalled him. Remember George H.W. Bush was something of a public figure at that time. He was a candidate for the U.S. Senate at the time of Kennedy’s assassination. As chairman of the Harris County Republican party, he had made himself well known to Texas voters in an effort to secure the Republican nomination. There were hundreds of voters in Dealey Plaza on that day. Many were interviewed or gave accounts of what they had witnessed. None reported seeing Bush or even “that East Coast guy who’s running for the Senate.”

I see no evidence that Bush had paramilitary training or command experience in lethal operations. I just don’t think he that kind of guy. He was useful to the CIA in many other ways.

Judyth Varin Baker is the keynote speaker.

The organizers say the their event will be superior to the Dallas conferences sponsored by JFK Lancer and COPA.

“The meetings to be held there will be dominated by nostalgia for the past, not by cutting-edge research,” they say.

Which JFK conference looks most promising to you?






9 thoughts on “Santa Barbara conference highlights JFK as ‘national security event’”

  1. Oswald in doorway and holding a Coke bottle in left hand? Look closely and you see the line of Oswald’s left arm and the Coke bottle where his left hand would be. Did Oswald buy a Coke and then go outside to watch motorcade passing? Did he then go back inside still with the unfinished Coke when and where he .was accosted by the policeman? If that IS a Coke bottle then it is further proof ( if further proof were needed) that the doorway man IS Oswald.

    Search Google and YouTube for “Is someone holding a Coke in his left hand? Oswald TSBD doorway”.

  2. For a site named “”, you don’t have many right about the Santa Barbara conference. It’s difficult to compare the merits of alternatives when they are inaccurately or only partially described.
    We have six speakers in Santa Barbara:

    * Phil Nelson on the pivotal role of LBJ

    * John Hankey on GHWB in Dealey Plaza

    * Peter Janney on Mary Meyer & her diary

    * Ralph Cinque on the man in the doorway

    * Larry Rivera on Buell Wesley Frazier

    * Judyth Vary Baker on Lee in New Orleans

    * Jim Fetzer on the assassination of America

    Judyth’s middle name is not “Varin” and she is not the keynote speaker. But this is the place to be on November 22nd. For more, see

    1. For those of us who will not be able to attend, will there be videos/recordings made of each of the presentations, so that we may see these online at a later date? That kind of full disclosure (the exact opposite of what CIA has been doing over the years) would go far toward spreading the facts about this case to the general public, beyond those limited few who can attend these events in person.

  3. I think Mr. Morely is being a bit dismissive of the George HW Bush claim. There really is very good correlation between the figure on the sidewalk in front of the TSBD and George HW Bush, including posturally. So, it isn’t just a facial match; it’s the body that matches as well. But, the case involves so much more than the matching images. It includes George HW Bush interacting with police that day, where he was briefly detained. And it includes all the fishy stuff he said afterwards which makes you realize he’s hiding something. And no, he was not a national figure at the time that most people would recognize. When he ran for President in 1979, millions of Americans hadn’t heard of him and didn’t recognize him.

    And when it comes to Doorman, there is no doubt that he’s Oswald because he is wearing Oswald’s clothes- his very distinctive clothes. It can’t not be him.

    I understand why lonenutters are fighting it, but I don’t understand why any CT does. It’s Oswald in the doorway just as sure as it’s Jesus on the cross.

  4. jfk and his brother rfk threatened so many established power centers that gained the inside track during the president ike’s 1952-1960 run. from the cia to organized crime the pentagon, big oil co., the latin American corps that ran latin America like banana republics- all for their own wealth. George bush’s profile fits to a T as being at least in the know – his friend George demohnrenshilt was oswalds handler in texas. lbj had the backing of Kennedy’s enemies both in the cia and organized crime.

  5. I too can’t help but find a LOT of reasons to point to LBJ as one of the main culprits behind the assassination of JFK (and of RFK for that matter). LBJ hated Robert Kennedy and even though he officially dropped out of the running in early 1968, he considered re-entering the race in the summer, during the convention, according to historians. He wasn’t completely out of the campaign picture until after August of 1968. But the reason why I think that the JFK assassination went beyond Lyndon Baines Johnson is mainly because if it was just him, I think more would have leaked and been said about his guilt by now. There would probably have been less of a concerted effort to cover up the truth after say 1973 or certainly by the 1980s. Instead, we have CIA still holding onto some documents that are JFK assassination related—-50 years on! This to me points to an institutional “national security event” involving CIA, FBI and the military, with Lyndon Johnson as a key planner/cover up artist, but not operating alone. He had to have had help from other high places. What seems to have happened was the agencies or powerful backroom people who wanted JFK out (Dulles, Hoover, LeMay, others) had a key person to FILL the empty slot, so the coup by assassination became more likely as a ‘solution’ for them. Had Stuart Symington been Vice President, I don’t think assassination would have been as likely or seen as a working solution. Having LBJ ready to fill the slot made it almost a certainty to happen. Incidentally, what makes me think that CIA also didn’t operate alone is that Cuban invasion was off the table after November of 1963. LBJ wouldn’t have it. There seems to have been a line that Lyndon drew, saying in effect that he would be a willing participant in a coup, but would not use the assassination to invade Cuba, which even he thought was too risky. He had no problem with the Dominican Republic, with Indonesia, and with Vietnam however, so he was much more amenable to what the Dulles/Hoover/LeMay crowd wanted than Kennedy. I think there were trade offs made in the coup however. History is usually a lot messier than novels, and not so simple, as my case for trade offs makes.

Leave a Comment

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Scroll to Top