Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter 1 Share on Facebook 1 Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend 8 (10 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites (# of views)   11 comments

OpEdNews Op Eds

The NY Times' Ostrich Act on JFK Assassination Getting Old

By       Message Russ Baker     Permalink
      (Page 2 of 2 pages) Become a premium member to see this article as one long page.
Related Topic(s): ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

Well Said 4   Must Read 3   Valuable 2  
View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com Headlined to H3 7/30/11

- Advertisement -

Nothing on this Oswald-de Mohrenschildt-Bush connection has ever been mentioned by The Times (save a one-sentence pooh-pooh in the paper by the late establishment historian Stephen Ambrose in 1992.) However, The Times did cover de Mohrenschildt's suicide, shortly after his final correspondence with Bush and shortly before he was expected to testify before the new House Select Committee on Assassinations.

Speaking of which, The Times rarely reminds readers that the House committee itself concluded that Kennedy's death was probably the result of an elaborate conspiracy (i.e., it was not a "loner" operation), but with no Soviet or Cuban government involvement.

How to explain this see-no-evil act? There are many reasons that news organizations will not tell the whole story, or fudge what could be revealed. Whatever is behind this shameful failure, reporters and editors know that the JFK assassination is just "too hot to handle," that it is a kind of electrified third rail that can destroy a journalism career. But even well-founded fear -- of being ridiculed, marginalized, demoted, or otherwise penalized -- is no justification for this unrelenting pattern of behavior at an institution that promotes itself as a "paper of record."

Anyone who calls him- or herself a journalist must be willing to take risks for the truth. After all, if the public can't count on journalists to get it right on the big stories, why should they trust us on the rest? And if journalism can't be trusted, democracy is on a slippery slope.
- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -

Next Page  1  |  2

 

- Advertisement -

Well Said 4   Must Read 3   Valuable 2  
View Ratings | Rate It

Author, investigative journalist, editor-in-chief at WhoWhatWhy.com

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon


Go To Commenting

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
- Advertisement -

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

The Real Reason For The Afghan War?

The Military and Those Strange Threats to Obama

CloseReading: Are Joe Biden's "Gaffes" Accidental? Or Brilliant?

Tea Party Types say: Next Overboard, Lifeguards!

NY Times' Umbrella Man Exposed

JFK Umbrella Man -- More Doubts