The JFK Assassination Research Community and Me

When Hidden History was published in November 2014, I naturally assumed that the JFK research community would be drawn to it. After all, I’d spent over a decade on the most high-profile internet forums, posting regularly and even as a moderator on London’s Spartacus Education Forum.

However, despite the unexpected success of my book, this natural demographic base has all but ignored it. There have been some notable exceptions, of course. Douglas Caddy was very supportive from the beginning. So was John Barbour. Vince Palamara wrote a nice review, as did Jim DiEugenio. Roger Stone loved the book, and will be writing the Introduction to the paperback version, due for publication this July. But the vast majority of those I’d come to know and interact with, in a cyber sense, over the years, have avoided any mention of Hidden History like the plague.

John F. Kennedy, Jr.’s death is mentioned sporadically on these forums. Whenever it is, I usually try to post something about my investigation into the case, which I humbly suggest produced some groundbreaking information, and was recounted in Hidden History. But even there, posters seem to pretend my work on the subject doesn’t exist, and will instead refer again to internet articles from 1999.

I’ve tried to wrap my mind around all this. Are some posters simply jealous? Certainly, I alienated a number of those I denigrated for being “neo-cons,” or mere pseudo proponents of conspiracy. I also incurred the wrath of many of the most immature “researchers,” who insisted on name-calling, foul language and threats as part of their “debating” tactics.

On Facebook, I have nearly 1,500 friends. The majority of these are people interested in either the JFK assassination, 9/11, or a variety of conspiratorial subjects. Yet when I post about my book, invariably few of them even “like” it, yet alone comment. When I shared former Rep. Cynthia McKinney’s glowing comments about one of my interviews, the response was negligible from the “conspiracy” crowd, most of whom I know deeply admire her.

On another occasion, I shared actress Susan Olsen’s (who played Cindy on The Brady Bunch) promo link to the interview I was going to do on her LA Talk Radio show. The only “like” and only comment came from Olsen herself. Early on, when I posted the news that Hidden History had reached #1 in two different Amazon categories, or when I notified my Facebook friends that it had sold out, resulting in an additional printing, it garnered a bit more attention, but never much from the JFK research crowd. As time went on, and more copies of the book were sold, it actually seemed as if it was getting less attention from “researchers.”

I understand that many, if not most, JFK assassination researchers treat the case as if it occurred in a bubble. I’ve tried to point out numerous times that these events are inevitably intertwined. The corruption didn’t start on November 22, 1963, and didn’t stop with the publication of the Warren Report. On the contrary, it’s an ongoing process, a way of doing business. That should be obvious to astute observers by now, but to many well-respected researchers, such talk is beyond the pale.

I won’t mention any names. But it’s beyond perplexing to recall all the JFK forum regulars who told me how much they were breathlessly awaiting my book, only to encounter absolute silence from them after its publication and surprising success. Older books like JFK and the Unspeakable continue to be promoted on Facebook and the forums, but my book is evidently anathema to these same posters. David Talbot’s Devils’s Chessboard hardly needs the promotion of these researchers on Facebook, but they promote it there relentlessly. Talbot is just one of many high profile figures that were interested in, and received a review copy of Hidden History, yet never even responded to my follow up regarding their impressions of the book.

It remains an inexplicable phenomenon that a book lauded by the likes of Cynthia McKinney, Roger Stone, Cindy Sheehan, John Barbour, Jerome Corsi, Rob Dew of Infowars and many others, has been virtually shunned by the hordes on the internet who are supposedly obsessed with the subject matter Hidden History largely addresses. I’m left to wonder just who is buying and reading it.

Because of the near lack of support I’ve received from what should logically have been my default base, the sales and interviews that exceeded my wildest expectations seem all the more astonishing. If the public support of Cynthia McKinney didn’t impress them, then I suppose nothing will.

Reading some recent threads at one of these forums reminded me again of just how naive some of these posters are. There are JFK assassination researchers who actually support Hillary Clinton and believe she will just continue the “good” things President Bill Clinton did. Perhaps, then, much of their reluctance to mention my book is based upon their misguided allegiance to the phony “left” and “right” paradigm. If you can’t see how corrupt politicians like the Clintons are, then you probably aren’t going to like my book.

If this sounds like sour grapes, perhaps it is. But it’s a bizarre kind of sour grapes, since my book has done much better than I thought possible. The non-support of JFK assassination researchers hasn’t hindered sales, but it does bother me. The silence is worse than criticism. I’d actually prefer that some of them would post about it, and demonstrate its flaws. But they don’t do that. Instead, they avoid any mention of Hidden History. Whenever I’ve referenced it at a pertinent spot in a particular discussion thread, the thread pretty much stops.

I’ve commented before on how dysfunctional the critical community is. It always has been, to some extent; but the fracturing, the petty disputes, the professional envy, is more pronounced now than ever. Many who have never written a single book cling to their own particular theories, and label anyone who dissents as a “disinfo agent” or a “troll.” “Respectable” researchers adamantly maintain there were no shots from the front, or that Oswald was not being impersonated, or that there were no suspicious deaths, or that Steven Witt was the Umbrella Man.

I once tried to get researchers to rally around a very simple conclusion, a media talking point, that would express our collective thoughts on this issue. Here is the thread I started about this on the Education Forum: Can We Agree On A Consensus Statement Regarding Conspiracy?  You can read for yourself just how successful I was.

To put it mildly, my experiences over the years with the often bombastic, difficult personalities who gravitate to JFK assassination research, have created a powerful rift between us. I still post there sometimes, when the spirit moves me, but we are separated, and maybe ultimately headed for divorce.  They ridicule the likes of Alex Jones and Coast to Coast AM, two of the most conspiracy-friendly press venues that exist. They have a very restricted view of what is and isn’t “respectable.” As I’ve told them many times, the establishment press isn’t going to listen to them, or like them, no matter how “neo-con” and reasonable they try to appear.

I’ve been researching the JFK assassination since 1975 or so. The subject continues to fascinate me, and I will always be drawn to it. But the vast majority of those who call themselves “researchers,” and post regularly on internet forums, hold no such fascination for me. On the contrary, I’m done trying to analyze them or debate them.

I’ve been thinking about writing this blog entry for quite some time. It isn’t easy to express my thoughts on this, without sounding whiny and over-sensitive. But it had to be said, and hopefully readers will understand where I’m coming from.


About donaldjeffries

Author of the critically acclaimed best sellers "Hidden History: An Expose of Modern Crimes, Conspiracies, and Cover Ups in American Politics,""Survival of the Richest: How the Corruption of the Marketplace and the Disparity of Wealth Created the Greatest Conspiracy of All," and the newly released "Crimes and Cover Ups in American Politics: 1776-1963." Author of the 2007 sci-fi/fantasy novel "The Unreals," which has been described as a cross between The Wizard of Oz and The Twilight Zone, and compared to A Confederacy of Dunces and classic Russian literature. A second edition of "The Unreals" was published in February 2015 by Pocol Press. Long time JFK assassination researcher. Seeker of truth, proponent of justice and fairness. Enemy of corruption. Sender of as many "tiny ripples of hope" as possible.

Posted on May 25, 2016, in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. 21 Comments.

  1. David Bartram

    I don’t know much about about the group of people you are referring to, but maybe they find that too many of your views are outside the bounds of proper liberal opinion. I enjoyed both “Hidden History” and “The Unreals” partly because there are ideas that are outside the box of traditional left thinking. I appreciate this, it has opened up my awareness to lots of ideas I migh not have considered before, whether I agree with them or not. I’m glad to have found your books and look forward to reading more.

  2. Thanks for the kind words, David. You’re probably right- most of the critical community is mired in traditional “leftist” dogma. If you’re so inclined, Amazon reviews are always appreciated- especially for the second edition of “The Unreals. I hope to be posting details on the next book soon- tentatively titled “Survival of the Richest.”

  3. Mike in Maryland

    I read your book after it came out and believe it to be well researched and solid. I’ve followed this topic for twenty plus years and am amazed that the in-fighting seems to generate a lot of heat and no light. Sure there are plenty of differences of opinion, but one thing that people generally agree on is that the mainstream account of what happened that day and the events leading up to it are errant, and the resulting report from Warren was another propaganda event. Some of those that were in power then are still alive now and still have reason to perpetuate the charade on the citizens of the US.

  4. Don, I am a Trump democrat. I’ve been following your blog for about 2 years. I look forward to reading your blogs. I discovered you on the education forum. I’ve been following you for about 2 years. I share your beliefs, there’s not many like yourself, who has the ability to divorce themselves from a particular political ideology and have the ability to see reality. I believe both parties are pro establishment and corrupt, and because of this corruption, we are headed on a course that will ruin our country. I have bought your book “Hidden History” and I like it. I agree with your observation that most JFK researchers don’t consider all the corruption that happened after the assassination and as a result of the assassination. I remember your “Can We Agree On A Consensus Statement Regarding Conspiracy?” I think that thread had been long over due. I was glad someone had finally asked for a consensus. There should have been many more researchers replying to your thread, trying to reach a consensus, but there was only a few pages. I believe there may be 3 reasons why the research community has not endorsed or responded to your book. (1) Most in the research community are liberal, progressive democrats who are locked into a political ideology from the late 1960s. They are incapable of understanding reality outside of this ideological perspective. They probably believe you are just another republican-conservative so because of this, whatever you write can not be of any value. (I know you are a libertarian who supports Trump).(2) For whatever reason, you are probably regarded by the others as a newbie, or an outsider. Probably many or most of these researchers have known each other for a long time. Although you have been a researcher since the HSCA during the 1970s, you are probably not in their clique. (3) Maybe you should give your theory or opinions more often. You may not have the evidence that could get a conviction in court, but I believe you have a good idea of what really happened on November 22, 1963. People like me would like to hear your opinions and theory. I would value it more than most theories I have heard before. And if someone doesn’t like it, and they are treating you unfairly, stand up for yourself and tell them so.



  5. Your intentions were certainly well meaning, Mr. Jeffries, blessed are the peacemakers. After reading your linked consensus statement, I agree. There has yet to be a genuine investigation into what really happened on Friday, November 22, 1963; and, yes, the wrongfully accused was indeed framed.

  6. As a former Texas peace officer I was, over 20 years ago, assigned to guard a U S Marshal’s prisoner who was being transferred from one federal hospital to another. When I first showed up the US Marshal at the hospital room door asked me if I knew who was inside the room. I did not. I was told that I would be inside the room with one of the FOUR HEADS [not just an ordinary soldier] of the Mafia in the south.

    After a couple of days [I was UNEASY 🙂 at first !] the old man and I started talking. On the 4th day I asked him about Lee Harvey Oswald. The man knew LHO AND Jack Ruby BOTH. And, LHO & Ruby knew each other, a fact long denied! Anyway, the man [who knew he was going to die in prison shortly.] said LHO was nothing like he has been portrayed. Very smart [this from a man who dodged the feds for 40 years] and very gregarious.

    I personally [after studying this for 40 years] believe LHO was exactly what he said he was, a patsy. I also am certain that LHO was either CIA or Naval Intelligence!

  7. Here’s what I found after about 10 minutes of research into the alleged JFK assassination. T
    They most likely faked it… And guess what? The best evidence is right in front of our noses, with his son JFK Jr. and his wife Carolyn Bessette who faked their deaths and became WYC and Corrine Grousbeck, current Co-owners of the Boston Celtics…

    It’s funny, how it all went down so overtly… She hated the public sector because the photographers wouldn’t give here a moments peace, and so they simply opted out, and now they donate money to the school for the blind LOL… Kind of an inside joke as they mock us for not seeing them for who they really are…. Hooray for Hollywood, oh yeah, that’s right Grandpa did own a Hollywood production house didn’t he?

  8. I just found this post by you, a year or more after you wrote it. I hope you are alerted to it and read it.

    I would like to talk to you about the JFK case. I think that what I have to say you will find interesting.

    • I am going to assume that you read my post. (Since it is not moderated anymore)

      If we (the so-called “research” community) is going to solve this case then they are going to have to come to grips with Zapruder and his role in the events that day. He is the key to solving this case. The evidence is there. As I stated in the Education Forum (right before I was silenced by the way) Zapruder is the elephant in the room and he is and always has been the key to solving this case.

      • BTW, if the EdForum tells you my posting privileges were restricted because I took down my photo ID, do not believe them. That is not what happened. They took away my posting privileges PRIOR to me taking down my photo ID. That was the reason that I took down my photo ID. After I was restricted, I tried to PM the Admins to find out what I did to cause it, I could not PM either. I took down my photo ID in response to being restricted.

  9. So why did I seek your forum?

    The other day you talked about Huey Long on CoastToCoast. I did not listen to your interview but I did read about it. From what I gather, you pointed out that the perception that we have today of Huey Long is not anything near the truth of the matter. He was not a goat, but more like a “hero”.

    I have long known, that the media can turn hero’s into goats and goats into hero’s. I see the hypocrisy that you see. I have seen it for a long time. Not only that, I know how it comes about.

    The key is to be able to see clearly and when you do you can see the inner workings, or what you call “Hidden History”. Once that bell is rung you cannot unring it.

    The JFK case is an excellent place to practice all those skills that are required to see clearly, in my opinion.

    Now, I am not going to post anymore until I get some evidence that you are reading this.

  10. As you should know, I don’t have a lot of support from those who most frequently post at the big forums. I alienated many of them by supporting people like you, or Jim Fetzer, Ralph Cinque, or Brian Doyle, when I felt that a mob mentality was causing them to act unfairly. I’m not sure what you think I can do. None of the moderators listen to me at the EF. To be honest, you’re probably better off without my support.

    As I noted in the article you’re commenting on, the JFK research community has always been filled with difficult, arrogant personalities. For whatever reason, those that run the most popular forums have labeled you as persona not grata, much as they labeled the likes of Fetzer, Cinque, and Doyle the same way. I’ve always tried to point out to them that there are plenty of others that seem guilty of the things they accuse people like you of. Clearly, they pick and choose and discriminate selectively. Maybe you can start your own forum. I don’t know what else to suggest.

    • Finally(for now) I just want to say that I think that you and I have other things to talk about. I always try to read your posts.

      You are most interested in the truth and so am I. To me it is paramount and I suspect it is to you. That is one thing that you and i have in common but it is enough.

    • I just re-read your article above and also your reply to me. I learned long ago that I need to re-read things to make sure I understand them the way the author intended.

      Don, I am not looking for your help so you do not have to be concerned about that.

      You did not alienate anyone by supporting me. When I was posting at the Ed Forum 5 years ago, I made over 700 posts and I only remember one time when you posted something in support of me. So you cannot blame me for that. If you are alienated, (which I do not think you are) it was not because you supported me.

      I hardly ever got support from anyone, but I do not need to be supported. The evidence is my support.

      The reason this case has not been solved is because it has a politically incorrect solution. Period. I know that, and quite frankly, you should not that to,.

    • Have you ever heard the saying “The ‘truth’ has a certain ring to it” (I am sure you have). Well, as an author and researcher in the JFK case, that is the main thing you should be striving for, not acceptance, the ring of truth. If you hit that note all else will follow.

    • When you were writing your non-fiction books, didn’t you notice how certain things just fell into place? Unexpectedly fell into place. You might have been trying to steer them in a direction but they just would not go, but you followed the evidence and, suddenly, almost like the book had a life of its own, they facts just fell into place. When it finally gets put into words, it has the ring of truth. Have you noticed that?

  11. Thanks for responding. At least now I know I am not talking to myself.

    I am not like Fetzer, Cinque or Doyle. If you did support me I thank you for it and you did the right thing.

    I was never the victim of a the mob mentality. It was usually just a few of the strongest personalities ( like Duncan Macrae, and one of those fellow from England that ended up in the ROKC forum cant remember his name). What people did/do not like about me is that I present my cases a little bit to confidently. I know that.

    • I am quite sure that if I did start to post at the EdForum again (which is looking very unlikely) people like Duncan Macrae would reapply for membership just to debate me. I also know that traffic to their forum would pick up quite a bit just because of the subject matter that I would bring up. I may not have posted for 5 and one half years, but I have done a lot of research during that time and I have a lot to say.

  12. Here is one more thing about the JFK case…

    I do not think that it was an accident that Zapruder was put on TV that day. I think the story is he accidentally ran into a reporter who put him on TV. I think that was always part of the plan. It was designed to place him above suspicion. In effect the main stream media was placing him above suspicion by doing that. They were trying to create a positive first impression.

  13. Well, getting approval and support from infowars isn’t much of a help, I think, because they are regarded by many as controlled opposition.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: