History Channel, Stop RW Kennedy Smears!

[G_j]

http://stopkennedysmears.com/

Sign Our Petition!
The script for the upcoming "The Kennedys" miniseries on The History Channel is right-wing character assassination, not "history." Until The History Channel stops running politically motivated fiction as historical "fact," I will refuse to watch their programming.


Historians' Response to the Smears:

"If the authors of this travesty had any conscience or any honesty they'd rename it. Call these people Sullivans or Schwartzes or some other name because they certainly aren't Kennedys as I know them."
- David Nasaw

"It struck me that the writer wanted to tell as distorted a story as possible, and find very little in the Kennedy years that possessed any dignity what so ever."

- Rick Perlstein

"I was amazed to find reading those pages that every single conversation with the President in the Oval office or elsewhere in which I according to the script participated, never happened. There were no such conversations... A minimum amount of research could've avoided the remarkable number of obvious errors of that kind in this script."
- Ted Sorensen

"The script becomes, historically, ever more loony and juvenile, as the writers invent more and more phony events to give an impression of a President Kennedy out of his depth, and dependent on others for advice."
- Nigel Hamilto

More Interviews:
http://stopkennedysmears.com/interviews.html

[Lerkfish]

1. not too surprising: I watched the RW smear of hippies they did last year

pretty much portrayed them as terrorists and didn't interview a single person to oppose their premise.

[tom_paine]

2. Truly amazing, but how effective Gleichschaltung has been

(Google It)

I don't watch Cable TV anymore, so I cannot imagine to what level the lunacy has progressed, but ut was getting pretty bad four or five years ago.

I remember MANY History Channel RW Disinformation Ops rewriting history from the 60s, John Lennon, but many MANY moreso during early Bushification 2001-2004.

One particularly egregious RW lunatic revision ad was trying to make the Tripoli attack on the Barbary Pirates seem JUST LIKE Iraq.

One of the ads went, "Another George W. sent a mission to the Middle east" or somesuch, and there was CONSTANT misinformation (often by targetted omission, which was an Eatrly Bushie special...and still is one of their favorites) linking CheneyBush to all sorts of historical figures including James Madison, etc.

They piled it on very thick for quite some time on a number of Bushiganda Ops during early Bushification.

[blm]

8. and they made sure to give life to the claim that Johnson was part of conspiracy to kill Kennedy,

but, somehow 'historians' never found the note from JEHoover that a 'George Bush of the CIA' wanted access to Kennedy assassination files.

[Sebastian Doyle]

10. How could they miss that memo?

It's easy enough to find.....

[tom_paine]

31. It's amazing what clouds the vision when the name "Bush" is attached to something.

How they do it, and how they have managed to 99.9999% successfully cover up the Bush Family's involvement with most of the worst crimes committed both by and against our nation, going way back to Prescott Bush in 1934 as part of the coup plot against Roosevelt, is a matter of speculation for we can never truly see the full extent of Imperial machinations that go on behind the scenes, even in the Internet Era.

We just see that it is done, time and time again without fail.

[no limit]

13. Did you watch the same show on the hippies as me?

I dont remember any smears. Maybe my memory is fuzzy.

[Lerkfish]

34. well, too numerous to mention, but of note:

that all clashes with police were started by the hippies, including the chicago convention riots.
that the hippies sold out to wall street in the end.

those two stuck out at me as diametricately opposed to the reality.

[no limit]

35. I'll have to pay more attention to that next time it comes on.

When I watched it I thought it was a very interesting documentary but I wasn't around back so I didn't know how accurate it was. I'll pay attention next time around, thanks.

[Lerkfish]

38. well, that's what they do: they rewrite history for those who weren't around back then

I was, so I know they're misrepresenting facts.

[Echo In Light]

15. Yes....that one is truly grotesque.

[Sebastian Doyle]

3. The "History" channel is owned by

ABC "we really want to be FAUX"/Disney and Hearst "we were right wing reactionary bullshit before Murdoch was born" Publishing.

When I had that channel, I would skip any programming they had on the Kennedys or on 9/11, because I knew every word of it would be a goddamned lie.

They should go back to the Hitler 24/7 format. Since they were obviously such fans of his propaganda department.

[rcrush]

5. What part are you referring to?

Whenever I watched the History channel specials on The Kennedy assassination or 9/11 they always push the "Official Story" never questioning anything. They even say to the viewer stuff like "As you can see there is no conspiracy here". I stopped watching their specials because of that also.


I'm only asking because whenever someone mentions that they question the "official story" around here they get labeled a freeper and flamed to death.

[Sebastian Doyle]

6. Amazing, isn't it?

When did "freepers" question the actions of the Bush Crime Family? Yet, the "professional debunkers" in the 9/11 basement would certainly have you think so.

[rcrush]

7. Never made sense to me either

Every Liberal can agree that Bush was a liar, a murderer, a cheat, a stupid, a puppet by Cheney/International Banking cartel, hired flunkies, part of a secret society that steals indian skulls from graves.


BUT staging a false flag attack and killing 3000 of our own citizens is just NOT something Bush or Cheney would ever even think about doing!


Fuck it. Have to learn to keep your mouth shut around here.

[Echo In Light]

20. There's monumental worldview overhaul & responsibility involved in acknowledging the obvious re 9/11

For the deniers, at least the ones who honestly believe "twoofers" are "crazy," there is an enormous incentive in defending the status quo worldview, b/c w/o it, the ENTIRE game is rigged, which ushers in the reality of having to find a different approach to dealing w/tyrannical govt. They'd rather remain safe and smug keeping the game as-is, which allows them the illusion of being reasonable/level headed, which, psychologically, explains their vehement drumbeat that any who question official 9/11 doctrine must actually be 'mentally ill.' ... although doesn't quite justify their apparent delight in mocking those who are, if we're to take them at their word, mentally ill.

[G_j]

24. well said nt

[no limit]

36. Lol, what I find funny about this is you think everyone else is crazy

and that you are the normal one because you saw some stupid video that can be (actually has been) easily debunked.

[no limit]

17. Do you think they concluded "no conspiracy here" because there was no conspiracy?

In fact the one show I remember was where they totally disproved the idiotic conspiracy claim that you can't fire a rifle that fast and that accurate.

Or the shows they had that debunked the 9/11 nuts point by point?

Now if your beef is with them showing the facts that totally piss on your dumb theories then I can see where you are coming from.

[Echo In Light]

18. They are pushing 2012 "disasters" to the nth degree now

Which, on one level can be somewhat entertaining, if only b/c you realize there might be a 'seeding-the-public-mind-accordingly' element involved ;)

[rcrush]

19. I hate that "Apocalypse Man"

He just reminds me of a crack head digging through abandoned buildings looking for stuff to sell.

[Echo In Light]

21. We've switched over to Jesse Ventura's CT show

[rcrush]

22. His show is ok.

Nothing I Havent seen on Youtube though. And he likes to cheese it up with the dramatic re-enacting.

[Echo In Light]

23. lol...yeah, I know. The "Big Bro" society & Bildergerg episodes were decent

[Number9Dream]

4. Signed & forwarded

Thanks for bringing this to our attention.

[G_j]

39. thanks

can't hurt

[hughee99]

9. Holy shit, if I remember right, this is exactly what the RW was saying

about the Reagan movie. Not accurate, distorted, made up conversations, etc...

[catbyte]

11. Who heads the Discovery Channel, TLC, History Channel, etc.?

I've noticed that they play into fundy topics/interests quite frequently as evidenced by their Duggar obsession, Jon and Kate, all their Anti-Christ and prophesy "documentaries". I used to like watching these channels, but now it makes me vaguely queasy. It doesn't surprise me that they'd jump on a hatchet job about the Kennedys.

There is a difference between the Reagan movie and this proposed series--Reagan actually didn't care about AIDS victims and Nancy really did consult an Astrologist. It was the truth, and it didn't fit in with the whole Reagan myth.

:puke:

Diane

Anishnabe in MI

[no limit]

16. Really? The universe, how the earth was made, numerous shows on global warming

play right in to the RW hands? I dont see how so. did you watch the 2 hour special from "the universe" about the big bang?

[catbyte]

27. You really can't see a slant?

I didn't say all their programming was suspect, but it definitely has a fundamentalist/apocalyptic tilt lately. Although, their Life After People series is interesting...

Diane

Anishnabe in MI

[Echo In Light]

30. Exactly...effective propagandists know how/why/when. Otherwise it's a FOX red herring

[no limit]

33. If you could point to some examples I'd be happy to look at them

But as someone that absolutely loves the history channel no, I don't see a slant. Some of their religious and nostradamus crap is a bit annoying but when that comes on I just change the channel. And although I find those shows annoying from what I've seen they always have a very healthy dose of skepticism in them.

[hughee99]

29. So it's okay to make up a conversation

as long as one believe's they are conveying what the person really thought? I'll be honest, I don't care as much about the grand conspiracy as you seem to, but either a biographical is attempting as closely as possible to depict actual events, or it's "dramatizing", in which case other peoples opinions are injected into the material. I've haven't seen the Kennedy movie so I have no idea what the extent of the dramatization is, but I do remember when the Raygun movie came out (which I also didn't watch), and if I recall, the big quote from Raygun was based on a conversation that never happened.

[tom_paine]

28. Standard projection of authoritarians onto their victims.

The Nazis accused the Jews of being serial liars and propagandists out to enslave the world.

The KKK accused the Liberals and African-Americans they abused and or/killed of faking the incidents or being authoritarian-follwers (Communists).

And the beat goes on. Someone once said, "History may not repeat but it sure does rhyme".

[Bitwit1234]

12. Way back they showed a series

about Smedley Butler and the republicans wanted him to overthrow the government. And it had some inference to Prescott Bush. To my knowledge, I was going to tape it, it was not shown again. I have searched their vast library and there is nothing there about this show. So if it is republican and negative forget it. I would love to see one of the cable channels have the spine, the guts, or the balls to make a really truly one about the BUSH's.

[G_j]

37. sounds like that would have been interesting

I don't think I've ever even heard Butler's name mentioned on TeeVee.

[SoCalDem]

14. The Kennedys are always a target..and it will only get worse now

The younger generation were raised in a different time, and of course the originals were "larger-than-life"./..but now that they are all gone now, their lives will be fodder for every two-bit "documentarian" with an agenda.

The only thing that helps is that so much of their lives exists on film..

[Snazzy]

25. PBS American Experience had a neocon in their 2 hr Kennedy show

Saw in last couple of days. Couldn't believe it, said some cruel stuff about Ted. Basically just non-sequitur for what I thought was an mostly interesting piece, out of the blue pissing on his grave.

Just figured out who she was via their transcript.

Midge Decter
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midge_Decter

Midge Decter (born July 25, 1927, in St. Paul, Minnesota) is an American neoconservative journalist and author of various books. With Donald Rumsfeld, Decter is the former co-chair of the Committee for the Free World and one of the original drivers of the neoconservative movement with her spouse, Norman Podhoretz. She is also a founder of the Independent Women's Forum, and was founding treasurer for the Northcote Parkinson Fund, founded and chaired by John Train.

...

She is also a member of the board of trustees for the Heritage Foundation, an influential Washington, D.C.-based public policy research institute.

She is one of the signatories to Statement of Principles for the Project for the New American Century.<2>

She is the mother of the conservative syndicated columnist John Podhoretz, the youngest of her four children, and the second by Norman Podhoretz. She is also the mother of Rachel Decter who married Elliott Abrams in 1980.

----

The Neocon mothership.

I take it something is still amiss at PBS.

I guess I say it was an interesting piece mainly because it had some footage I'd never seen, and a few decent interview snipets, but something was wrong with the tone, pace, focus. Evidently rules in place to give equal time to neocons.

"Kill your teevee!"

[G_j]

26. good catch

what a sham, reminds me of the Zinn obit.

[Snazzy]

32. The Horror-witz

Kennedy bashing book is listed in the teachers resources. Probably both consulting for the History Chan.

[G_j]

40. k