Lyndon Johnson, Sinister
ÒColossusÓ
A review
To comment on this
article go to BÕManÕs Revolt.
I am more and more impressed by the fact that it is largely futile
to get up and make statements about current problems. At the same time, I
know that silent acquiescence in evil is also out of the question.
Thomas Merton, Faith and Violence, 1968
The more we learn about the 36th
president of the United States, the more we see the fairly modern words
ÒsociopathÓ or ÒpsychopathÓ associated with his name. (Do a Net search pairing ÒLyndon
JohnsonÓ with each.) As one reads
Phillip F. NelsonÕs sequel to LBJ, the
Mastermind of the JFK Assassination entitled LBJ: From Mastermind to ÒThe Colossus,Ó the very old fashioned
word of ÒevilÓ is the one that comes repeatedly to my mind. JohnsonÕs own grandmother, Ruth Baines, according
to Nelson, sized up his character when he was only five years old and predicted
that he would end up in the penitentiary.
Instead of becoming a problem for a prison
warden, though, he became a problem for his country and for the world. In his first volume, Nelson argued
persuasively that what many had suspected all along but were afraid to face up
to it or share their suspicions with others, that is, that LBJ was behind his
predecessorÕs assassination.
And why wouldnÕt he have been? He was the primary beneficiary, after
all. He appointed the Warren
Commission, and they performed what most people realize now was a monumental
cover-up by pinning the entire blame upon a low level secret government operative
with no motive and without the means to have fired all the shots that were
fired. Once it is acknowledged that the assassination was the result of a plot
involving a number of people it follows inexorably that the man who would
become president had to have been, at the very least, on board with it. Otherwise, it would have been entirely
too risky for the plotters. The killing also occurred right on JohnsonÕs Texas
turf, and he had been instrumental in getting Kennedy to make the trip to
Dallas.
We also learned from that first volume that that
turf was already littered with bodies thanks to LyndonÕs machinations. While most of his new book is devoted to
analysis of LBJÕs actions once he became president, Nelson begins with a
further fleshing out of the story of the 1961 murder (originally improbably
ruled a suicide) of United States Department of Agriculture agent Henry
Marshall. Marshall had been hot on
the trail of the widespread fraudulent operations of Billie Sol Estes and
Lyndon JohnsonÕs intimate connections to them. Johnson, by that time, was already Vice
President, but had Marshall remained alive and on the case, his future did not
look bright.
The Real Lone Ranger
The hero of Chapter 1 is Texas Ranger Clint
Peoples, who was thwarted by the political muscle wielded by Johnson in his
attempt to get MarshallÕs cause of death changed from suicide to murder. Thanks mainly to his dogged continued
efforts, a federal grand jury in 1984 did change the ruling from suicide to
murder, but by then the likely culprits, LBJ and his henchmen Cliff Carter and
Malcolm ÒMacÓ Wallace, were all dead and there was no one to charge with the
crime.
Had Captain Peoples been able to have the cause
of death changed to ÒhomicideÓ in 1962 he could have aggressively pursued his
investigation of Johnson and probably brought an indictment and if that had
happenedÉthe name Lyndon B. Johnson would have been lost in the dustbin of
history as just another dirty politician who spent his last years in the
penitentiary, just as his own grandmother had predicted would occur.
Had Captain Peoples been successful in 1962, it
follows that John F. Kennedy might have remained president for another five years
and the 50,000 plus American men and women killed in Vietnam during the
Johnson-Nixon years would have also lived on. The millions of Vietnamese and
Cambodians killed during those years would also have been able to continue
living there lives, for the most part, as peaceful peasants. For those killed in the civil war, at
least it would not have been by the crusading Americans, but by their own
tribe, and in much smaller numbers.
There would have been many other changes if JohnsonÕs war had never occurred,
so many that it is impossible not to comprehend the Òwhat-ifsÓ of a culture
undamaged by the Johnson presidency.
One thing is clear though: The magnitude of that difference would have
been ÒcolossalÓ in the most literal sense. (pp. 18-19)
With his unblinking second look at the purely
evil deeds of which Lyndon Johnson was capable with his reign of terror in
Texas, Nelson stands out from the more mainstream biographers such as Robert Caro and Robert Dallek, no matter how comprehensive, unvarnished, and even
negative their portraits of the man might seem. This groundwork is essential for understanding
the further evils that LBJ perpetrated with respect to the Kennedy
assassination, the Vietnam War, and the Six Day War.
For the first of those subjects, one must read
NelsonÕs first volume on Johnson; thereÕs little rehash in this one. He addresses the other two, and much
more, in ÒThe ColossusÓ but before he
does, he does some more spadework in Texas. Some of that handiwork was recently put
on display at LewRockwell.com in the form of excerpts from the book. These are ÒLBJÕs
Double—Cousin Jay Bert Peck—And His Untimely DeathÓ and ÒJohn M. Liggett: From
Embalmer Extraordinaire to Serial Killer—then Dead Man Walking.Ó
Readers not wishing to digress by clicking on
those links might consider two shorter vignettes from the book that suggest
that the psychologists might, indeed, have some useful insights concerning LBJ
that transcend questions of morality.
The case can certainly be made that he was not just homicidal, but he
was a homicidal madman.
Life Imitates Art
The two passages I have chosen fall into what
one might call the Òlife imitating artÓ category. When George Carlin made his observation
at the 4-minute mark of this video that war is just a lot of prick waving,
it is highly unlikely that he knew of the incident that had occurred some two
decades before:
Another entry [in the daily notes of historian
Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.] made just a week before Johnson left the White House
for good indicated that Schlesinger had talked to Bill Moyers and Richard
ÒDickÓ Goodwin about the problems with anyone ever trying to write a book about
Johnson, because Òno one would believe it.Ó He also wrote that Moyers had said
that Johnson was a Òsick manÓ and that both Moyers and Goodwin read up on
mental illness. Goodwin tackled the paranoia issue and Moyers studied up on
manic-depressive cycles. Moyers
also appeared in a later note, dated November 11, 1971, when he made a comment
about how Johnson thought that his ÒmanhoodÓ had been tested during the period
of the escalation of the Vietnam War.
This was a particularly insightful point because it runs parallel with
an incident that occurred during the very period of the escalation, in a 1965
press conference held at his ranch.
A reporter had asked him to explain why we were at war with Vietnam and
President Lyndon B. Johnson, in response to that question, unzipped his pants,
withdrew his penis and, holding it so that all the reporters, male and female
could view it clearly, exclaimed ÒThis is why!Ó And with that the press
conference ended and everyone walked away, so stunned that the original
question was soon nearly forgotten.
Naturally, this incident was not widely reported in the press by those
same reporters, who were more concerned with protecting the president from such
knowledge becoming public.
Fortunately, there a few brave souls who made sure the record was duly
noted. (p. lii)
Sadly, from the picture that Nelson paints of
the man, had Johnson ventured a more serious answer to the reporterÕs question
he could hardly have done any better than he did. He knew nothing of world affairs. He was never a student of anything
except how to amass more power for himself and dominate other people. His complete ignorance of military
matters did not prevent him from pushing ahead in Vietnam and micro-managing
every aspect of AmericaÕs war, though.
Interestingly, one of Adolf HitlerÕs greatest
failings as a national leader is that he fancied himself a great military
strategist and meddled far too much in matters that he should have left to his
experts. In the following long
paragraph we see a Lyndon Johnson who is eerily reminiscent of Der FŸhrer in the much-parodied dressing down of his generals that is ubiquitous on
YouTube:
[Marine Corps] Lieutenant General [Charles G.]
CooperÕs book, A MarineÕs Story of Combat
in Peace and War, written with Richard E. Goodspeed,
provides a vivid description of the inner workings of the White House/Pentagon
decision-making process in 1967. It
also reveals something even more important than the chaotic manner in which the
White House made decisions; it documented yet another of Lyndon JohnsonÕs
manic—clearly psychotic—episodes as he screamed obscenities at the
very officers who had struggled to come up with an effective plan to achieve
the results that Johnson had demanded of them despite severely limiting their
options. Cooper had accompanied the
Joint Chiefs of Staff to the White House meeting, which they had requested, to
resolve a problem they felt was caused by the existing policy of Òpiling on
forces in Vietnam without understanding the consequences.Ó The Joint Chiefs were
led by the chairman, General Earle Wheeler of the US Army. The other chiefs of their respective
military organizations were: General Harold Johnson, the Army chief of staff;
General John P. McConnell, the Air Force chief of staff; General Wallace Greene
Jr., the commandant of the Marines Corps; Admiral David McDonald, the chief of
naval operations. Secretary
[Robert] McNamara had reluctantly acceded to their request after discussing and
preparing the president for their meeting.
While seeking the opinions of these generals and admirals, and
pretending to understand the strategic planning they had put together, Johnson
seemed to appear in deep thought as he processed the information, briefly
turning his back on them. The
following passages provide a vivid account of what happened next, as Cooper
held a map of Vietnam for the presentation by General Wheeler. As soon as he finished, Johnson began
his vicious assault, suddenly whirling around, screaming and cursing each of
them in turn. Lieutenant General
Cooper summarized his recollections of that frightening day:
Noting that it was he who was carrying the
weight of the free world on his shoulders, he called them filthy
names—shitheads, dumb shits, pompous assholes—and used Òthe F-wordÓ
as an adjective more freely than a Marine in boot camp would use it. It was unnerving, degrading.
Author CooperÕs stunning description of
presidential behavior to his visitors that day, as he quoted JohnsonÕs
statements—for example, those Òidiots gave him stupid advice, [adding
that] he had the whole damn world to worry aboutÓ –bespeaks more than the
words in the excerpt say. This was another
Johnson meltdown, an incident that suggests the ÒColossusÓ was in another
psychotic rage, just like those that Richard Goodwin wrote about in his book, or the account of lobbyist Robert
Winter-Berger
as he told of JohnsonÕs meltdown in Speaker McCormackÕs office in March 1964
covered elsewhere, that other historians go to great lengths to avoid because
it does not fit in well with the paradigm that they have attempted to
construct. (pp. 347-348)
The Vietnam War that that Johnson mishandled in
almost every way imaginable was not something he inherited from his predecessor
and struggled to cope with as best he could, as many historians would have us
believe, either. Although he was a stout anti-Communist,
Kennedy had all the subtle understanding of world politics that Johnson lacked
and was on his way to ending American direct participation in the war. One of JohnsonÕs very first decisions,
notes Nelson, was to reverse that policy and to set the course toward making
that war AmericaÕs war.
Johnson had three main reasons for escalating
the conflict in Vietnam, none of which had anything to do with sound
geopolitics. The first was connected
to that graphic display before the news reporters. We were the tough guys, and Lyndon was
just going to show those impudent little Vietnamese who was the boss. AmericaÕs military was to be used simply
as an extension of the Johnson personality, the psychotic bully. Second, the
JFK assassination could be regarded as a coup dÕŽtat by the national security
state—sometimes called the secret government—the leadership of
which Johnson through his machinations had acquired. One of the main purposes of the Kennedy
assassination was to reverse KennedyÕs course in Vietnam, so thatÕs what
Johnson promptly did.
Third—an explanation that I have first encountered in this
book—Johnson learned all his most important political lessons as a
pro-New Deal politician supporting Franklin Roosevelt in Texas. He always thought of himself in the most
grandiose terms, of his historical legacy.
Success in war, he saw from Roosevelt, was the surest way for history to
regard him as a ÒgreatÓ president. He
thought that victory would be relatively easy and he would be hailed as a hero
(shades of a later president from Texas).
Just as Johnson was a hands-on president, to a
fault, when it came to running the war, and up to his eyeballs in the JFK
assassination, so, too, must he have been at the pinnacle of the plots that
ended the lives of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy. Nelson devotes seven pages to the first
subject and an entire chapter to the second.
Not Giving the Devil His Due
Even the domestic legislation that he pushed
through, Medicare, Medicaid, and the various other ÒGreat SocietyÓ welfare
programs that he is credited for having pushed through may be regarded as
LyndonÕs attempt to buy popularity by the FDR method.
Nelson also takes a decidedly revisionist view
of JohnsonÕs accomplishments on the civil rights front. He reminds us that as the powerful
Senate majority leader he was the primary obstacle to the passage of any
meaningful civil rights legislation for many years, or any significant
legislation at all, for that matter.
Maybe he could be given the benefit of the doubt on that because he had
to get reelected in Texas, but, according to Nelson, he continued to be an
obstacle as vice president, repeatedly telling Kennedy that the time was not
right and offering none of the political clout with the Congress that he was
still able to wield. Knowing, in fact, that the time was
overdue for civil rights improvements, he wanted to make sure that he could get
credit for them when he became president through the plot that was brewing.
What LBJ was particularly good at was in seeking
power, in detecting where it truly lay, and figuring out how to best ingratiate
himself with the power wielders so that he could
participate in it. His abuse of his
subordinates was also legendary, which we get some flavor of in the military
episode cited and throughout NelsonÕs book. In my days in the bureaucracy I
encountered more than one of what we called the Òkiss up and kick downÓ
personality types. Lyndon is almost
a caricature of the ones I knew.
That Johnson should have bought a house in
Washington that made him a close neighbor of another such type, FBI Director,
J. Edgar Hoover, could hardly have been an accident, according to Nelson. He also sucked up to House Speaker and
fellow Texan Sam Rayburn and to the powerful Georgia Senator Richard Russell.
Even from Caro one quickly sees that LBJ from
his youth was a person with an uncommon nose for power. What we donÕt get from Caro or
from Dallek or from the outrageously mistitled Lyndon Johnson and the American Dream: The Most Revealing
Portrait of a President and Presidential Power by
Doris Kearns Goodwin is any great sense of
the real corrupt power that Johnson
sucked up to and on whose behalf he exercised his modicum of power once he had
achieved it. ThatÕs what sets NelsonÕs book apart and
makes it ÒmustÓ reading for anyone who would understand what Johnson did to the
country and where we are today. The
title of his Chapter 4, and the names of the section headings within it tell
the story.
Power for What and for Whom?
First, the title: ÒLBJÕs Use of AmericaÕs
Wealthiest and Most Influential—and How It Led
to Presidential Treason.Ó And here
are the section headings:
á President JohnsonÕs
Zionist Connections (1937-67)
á Lyndon Johnson: The
First Jewish President?
á 1941: Lyndon Johnson
Goes to War—in Hollywood
á The Zionist/Terrorist
Associates of LBJ
á Completing the Circle:
JohnsonÕs Long History of Indenture to Zionists
á A Quick Look at
Twentieth Century International Developments and Lyndon JohnsonÕs Role in Them
á Senator Lyndon JohnsonÕs
Favor to his Zionist Friends
á The Israeli Lobby, circa
1960-63 vs. 1964-68
That last section shows how the power of that
lobby over the American presidency grew exponentially with JFKÕs
assassination. To demonstrate that
Kennedy was standing up to Israel in opposition to its development of nuclear
weapons Nelson even reprints the entire text of the strong letter that Kennedy
wrote to Israeli Prime Minister Levi Eshkol on July 5, 1963, that one can read
on this Rense.com site. Following the logic, he even comes very
close to endorsing Michael Collins PiperÕs thesis, explained on that site, that
Israel was principally behind the Kennedy assassination:
Michael Collins Piper, in his controversial 1995
book, Final Judgment, made the case that the Mossad, through its direct connections to James Angleton
and its indirect other connections to the CIA front international corporation
known as Permindex—with its direct ties to Clay
Shaw, who had been indicted for his role in ÒhandlingÓ Lee Harvey Oswald in New
Orleans—was ÒinvolvedÓ in the
JFK assassinationÉ
There is no question that Kennedy took a hard
line against IsraelÕs procurement of nuclear weapons while Lyndon Johnson
reversed that to the point of giving in to their every demand, as we will
examine shortly. For the record, I
find that PiperÕs charge is not of equal credence with the assertions of
complicity by the other named parties in this and my previous book. Even if the Mossad
played a significant role in the assassination, it was inexorably tied to its
undeniably close connection to James J. Angleton, ÒIsraelÕs best friendÓ as
noted elsewhere, and his involvement would have been inherently dependent upon
the existence of the Òdriving force,Ó for which the chief driver and the only
man who had the power to bring all the other disparate forces together, as
demonstrated in LBJ: The Mastermind of
the JFK Assassination, was Lyndon B. Johnson. (pp.
205-206)
At this point, we must note that
Nelson can make such a confident assertion about LBJÕs primacy in the JFK assassination
by omitting all mention of a lawyer by the name of Louis Bloomfield. The following quote is from the
aforementioned Rense.com site: ÒThe
chairman of Permindex was Louis M. Bloomfield of
Montreal, a key figure in the Israeli lobby and an operative of the Bronfman
family of Canada, long-time [Meyer] Lansky associates and among Israel's
primary international patrons.Ó
OswaldÕs handler, Shaw, then,
would have been in world ZionismÕs chain of command and not in LBJÕs chain of
command. Furthermore, from reading
NelsonÕs Chapter 4 only, one might seriously wonder if Lyndon, himself, was
just another link in that command chain.
For more on this subject see my
article ÒThe
Kennedy Assassination and the Press,Ó particularly the section
entitled ÒWhoÕs Mister Big?Ó Who calls the shots for the news media, whose
crucial complicity is evident in every major scandal in living memory, from the
James Forrestal murder to 9/11? My
conclusion is that it is not the American president, even when the president
had the power that LBJ had.
Courageous New Ground
Nelson truly sets himself apart from all who
have gone before him on LBJ with his willingness to take a clear-eyed look at
two of the very biggest political hot potatoes of the twentieth century. These are the 1949 violent death of
AmericaÕs first secretary of defense, James Forrestal, and the 1967 Israeli
assault of the USS Liberty.
Taking the second of these first, devoting his
entire Chapter 7 to the topic, after careful detailed analysis Nelson comes to
what appears to be the inescapable conclusion that not only was the assault on
the Navy spy vessel not accidental, but that it was a carefully planned set-up
in which our president was treasonously complicit. It is abundantly evident that the
Israelis knew what ship that they were attacking and that they made every
effort to sink it, killing everyone on board. The Egyptians were to have been blamed,
ÒRemember the Liberty!Ó was to have been the resonating war cry, and the false
flag attack would have had the United States militarily involved in the Middle
East on behalf of its attacker 44 years before the events of September 11,
2001. The crewmen of the Liberty
were amazingly able to keep the ship afloat with 34 killed and scores wounded
and a gaping torpedo hole in the side, and to defeat radio-jamming efforts and
get out a call for rescue.
Initially, Johnson called back rescue planes with the clear intent of
letting the ship sink with all on board killed, and thereby silenced. Only when it became obvious that the
cover story was completely blown was the murderous attack called off.
But this single order to abandon all protection
for a US Navy spy ship is, lamentably, only incidental to an overall story
about greater deceits and treachery on the high seas, and in high places, one
that remains Òunresolved.Ó The
timeline referenced in the previous citation goes on, to include much of the
continuing developments covered within this chapter.
There is one entry in particular on that
extended timeline that is of more than the usual interest, under the date of
June 14, 1967, six days after the attack: ÒLiberty
arrives in Malta. Total news
blackout imposed. Rear Admiral
[Isaac] Kidd, acting on orders from [Admiral] John McCain II, warns crew: ÔYou are never, repeat never, to discuss this
with anyone, not even your wives.
If you do, you will be court-martialed and will end your lives in
prison, or worse.Õ Secretary of
Defense McNamara informs media that, ÔDepartment
of Defense will have no further comment.ÕÓ (p. 390) [Emphasis added by Nelson]
Nelson makes the further comment, ÒIt is
sobering to ponder what could possibly be ÔworseÕ than Ôending your life in
prisonÕ and why would McNamara announce that the Department of Defense would
have no further comment; this was a rather unusual statement, considering the
circumstances.Ó
What is abundantly evident is that extraordinary
efforts were made, after the sinking of the ship failed, to cover the whole
thing up. We saw the same thing 18
years before when Forrestal went out a 16th floor window of the
Bethesda Naval Hospital and the official investigation of the incident was kept
secret. The conclusion of my poem
written some months before I obtained the investigation with by third Freedom
of Information Act request applies equally to the Liberty incident:
Secret Forrestal Investigation
Did James V. Forrestal murder himself,
Or was he assassinated?
To examine the NavyÕs official report,
For 54 years we have waited.
Is there official skulduggery
here?
IÕll let you readers decide.
But usually when someone keeps something hidden,
ItÕs because he has something to hide.
What is little known to the public is that the
young Zionist partisan Johnson, freshly elevated from the House to the Senate
in a thoroughly tainted election, played a role in the Forrestal death saga,
albeit, probably no more than a bit part.
As we report in Part 1 of ÒWho Killed James Forrestal,Ó and Nelson does in
his Chapter 5, Johnson paid a visit to Forrestal at his room in Bethesda Naval
Hospital, to which the latter had been confined after he had experienced some
sort of mysterious breakdown. We
can rule out that it was an innocent social visit by a well-wisher. We learned of the visit from Driven Patriot: The Life and Times of James
Forrestal by Townsend Hoopes and Douglas Brinkley
and they learned of it from an interview by the late Hoopes
of Forrestal assistant Marx Leva, who also told them
that it was Òagainst ForrestalÕs wishes.Ó
Johnson and Forrestal were on far opposite sides
of the fence over the question of recognition of the new state of Israel. Forrestal, primarily out of concern for
U.S. strategic interests in the Middle East, had been the administrationÕs
strongest opponent of the Zionist venture and had suffered merciless, indeed
slanderous, attacks in the press on account of it.
Nelson speculates that the purpose of the visit
might have been to subject Forrestal, in his weakened emotional state, to the
notorious ÒJohnson Treatment,Ó a combination of Òsupplication, accusation,
cajolery, exuberance, scorn, tears, complaint, and hint of threat.Ó
He is suggesting, I suppose, that the intent was
to drive Forrestal even further over the edge and perhaps to induce him to kill
himself so others wouldnÕt have to do it.
Since their political differences should have been well known and since
Forrestal would have surely communicated to his doctors that JohnsonÕs visit
was unwanted, it amounts to virtual medical malpractice for the visit to have
been permitted. Not surprisingly,
the subject never came up when the Navy conducted its review.
My own guess is that Johnson was brought in on
that action in the manner in which a member of the Mafia becomes a Òmade
man.Ó Maybe he was asked to report
on the means of access to ForrestalÕs room for the phony patients on the same
floor who would eventually throttle him and throw him out the window. The role might have been wholly
superfluous, but he had been made a party to a monumentally treacherous
political act of the sort that would mark his entire political career, and it
would have been done on behalf of the people whom he would serve throughout his
life.
Nelson is quite convincing in his argument that
the Israelis would never have had the audacity to engage in their attack upon
the Liberty without Lyndon JohnsonÕs total knowing acquiescence. Nelson, citing British journalist Peter HounamÕs book, Operation Cyanide: How the Bombing of the USS Liberty Nearly
Caused World War Three, notes that B-52s
carrying nuclear weapons, with their refueling plane escorts, were scrambled
from the west coast of the United States some two hours before the Israeli
assault even began, between 2 and 4 am Pacific time and presidential adviser
Clark Clifford was urgently called to White House at around 6 am Eastern
time. Reminiscent of the BBC
reporting the collapse of Building 7 before it occurred, Johnson was apparently
prematurely reacting to the false flag attack on the Liberty. So deeply must he have been involved
that itÕs not a complete reach to say that he was as much the ÒmastermindÓ in
the killing of 34 American sailors as he was in the killing of his presidential
predecessor, and had the attack succeeded completely he would have been the
ÒmastermindÓ of an almost unspeakable atrocity.
No one could suggest, though, that with his
involvement in the Zionist plot against Forrestal he was doing any more than
getting his feet wet in a conspiracy that originated somewhere much higher than
he was at the time. One of the lessons
he surely learned from the success of the assassination was that he could count
on the cooperation of the press in covering up high
political crime as long as it was beneficial to those to whom he owed a higher
loyalty. Looking over the manÕs
entire political career, rather than to call him a ÒMastermindÓ or a ÒColossusÓ
or a ÒFlawed Giant,Ó as Dallek does in the title of
his biography, I think that ÒMalignant MinionÓ is more fitting.
David Martin
November 25, 2014
Home Page Column
Column 5 Archive Contact