5. "I'm not afraid to be afraid" -
so said R. Kennedy shortly before his death. After John's death, he must have decided to challenge fate at every turn. The new misfortune in the family only added to the desperation: eight months after the tragedy in Dallas, Edward Kennedy was involved in a plane crash, two passengers on the plane were killed, Edward received a serious spinal injury and only a few months later he was able to get back on his feet, but from now on he had to wear a special corset. Journalist W. Shannon asked Robert if his faith in God had been shaken by the death of two older brothers and the injury of the younger. "I didn't hesitate," he replied, " of course, we sometimes think that someone out there in heaven is sometimes napping when it would be necessary to do business."
In the last years of his life, Robert often went on escapades, difficult and dangerous for a forty-year-old man. There was a sickly sense of urgency, of urgency. "It seemed so," journalist X remarked. He slides into a terrible abyss, into an impending catastrophe. He was eager to do and try everything. That's when he started using a boat to cross the rapids and climb the mountains." Far from being a first-class climber, he has climbed the highest undefeated peak in North America, Mount Kennedy (4 thousand meters). m), named in memory of his brother. This was a dangerous undertaking: the steep mountain is located almost in the Arctic region of Canada. "I did it because I'm afraid of heights," Robert explained. Another challenge he put himself through in the tropics: in 1965, he jumped from a boat into the waters of the Amazon, teeming with predatory piranha fish. The Indians screamed in horror that he was risking his life. "Have you ever heard of an American senator being eaten by piranhas?" Robert shouted from the water and continued swimming. These were acts of self-affirmation.
R. Kennedy was well aware that physical courage alone was not enough to advance. When he was the Minister of Justice, he liked to make edifying speeches to his subordinates along the following lines:: "Don't forget that I came here to the ministry ten years ago as an assistant prosecutor with a salary of $ 4,200 a year. But I am capable and honest. I was interested in the case and stayed late in the evenings. My brother became president, and now I am a minister." Bobby paused and smiled as he finished: "Of course, these circumstances are not listed in the order of their significance." 1
The death of D. Kennedy deprived the Secretary of Justice of his usual support (and Hoover immediately resumed the old practice of directly reporting to the president, bypassing the minister), but could not take away from him the spiritual legacy of his late brother. Robert's popularity in the country has increased dramatically. The year 1964 came - the time of the next presidential election campaign. Those who worked with R. Kennedy had no doubts: Roberta - for vice-president! Jacqueline, who was about to greet the Democratic convention, announced that she was behind Bobby in any case. Robert himself officially announced on June 22, 1964, that he would not run for the Senate from the state of New York. He certainly thought he deserved to be vice president.
Ending. For the beginning, see Voprosy Istorii, 1970, No. 9.
1 N. Tkimmisch, W. Johnson. R, F. K. at 40. Boston. 1965, p. 26.
page 128
Johnson was of the opposite opinion. Ever since John's death, he had been looking for an excuse to stop working with Robert. On the outskirts of the 1964 election campaign, an opportunity presented itself to settle old scores. On June 29, the president summoned Robert and, without taking his eyes off the paper, read:: "I was thinking about the vice presidency. You have a bright future, a good name and courage, but you have been in government service for too long. I have seriously considered your candidacy and found it inappropriate to stand with you in the election." The president asked if Robert would decline the nomination himself. He declined the offer. Leaving the office, the shocked minister pleaded: "I would be very helpful." Johnson fatherly assured that in the coming months, R. Kennedy will be able to provide invaluable services to his beloved party.
When the president threw Robert overboard, he was overjoyed. "I'm going to get drunk now, guys!" Johnson said in his best Texan style. "Finally got the damn bird off my neck!" "Stop it!" he shouted triumphantly. The next day, the president invited three journalists to the White House. Over a long lunch, he relished his conversation with the ambitious minister (in his own interpretation, of course). The president mimicked Robert and even insisted that he heard him "choke" when he learned of the verdict. Helpful gossips immediately brought all this-verbatim and even with additions - to the attention of the Kennedy clan 2 . Kennedy's entourage did not hide their attitude to the new president. One of Robert's associates said of Johnson, "That son of a dog hit us!" 3 The president then denied Robert another request - to go to Vietnam as the American ambassador.
On August 25, the opening day of the Democratic National Convention in Atlantic City, Kennedy announced that he would run for the New York State Senate. At the convention, 5,000 delegates and guests gathered in a huge hall shouted for almost 15 minutes: "We want Kennedy!" He bowed at the podium, thanked for the trust and reminded of his brother: "When I think of President Kennedy, I think of Shakespeare's words in Romeo and Juliet:
When will he die,
Cut it into small stars,
And everyone will fall so in love with the night firmament,
What the day and sun will throw without attention.
Then R. Kennedy went to New York State to take away a seat from 64 - year-old Republican Senator K. Keating, who served in the Capitol for 18 years. Republicans tried to explain to New Yorkers that they already have their own senator, Keating, who only did good. Sensible Keating was really well known. Robert urgently needed to appear not as a cold statesman, but as a good-natured candidate. And on September 3, 1964, he resigned from the post of Minister of Justice... The civil service is finished. It's simple. And how to acquire the image of a good-natured person? Robert didn't underestimate the challenge. When a New York State television propaganda organizer told him, "The main purpose of our propaganda, Bob, is to portray you as a gentle, sincere person," Robert responded with rare humor.: "Are you going to use a doppelganger?"4 .
But it didn't come to that, so they did something more familiar. For 10 thousand dollars, they hired the satirist G. Gardner, who wrote jokes for entertainment programs. The rented helicopter set the pace for the campaign. Robert flew it around the state, performing everywhere. Helicopter rental fee is $ 525 per hour. In Harlem, Robert reported, " Harlem's War on poverty funding has been reduced to $ 30 million, not even a drop in the bucket for a city that spends $ 600 million annually on public welfare. The kids here aren't deaf. They know that our society spends $ 7 billion a year to send a man to the moon. They see the new buildings on Fifth Avenue and Madison Avenue. But they are deprived of all this." Vspom-
2 E. Goldman. The Tragedy of Lyndon Johnson. N. Y. 1969, pp. 79 199 - 200.
3 See W. Nicholas. Bobby Kennedy... N. Y. 1967.
4 D. Ross. Robert F. Kennedy: Apostole of Change. N. Y. 1968, p. 28.
page 129
speaking about the acute problem of water pollution, Robert confided at the rally: "You know, they say that Keating is dumping garbage into the Hudson River."
Influential Democrats in New York (and there were 120 of them) formed the committee "Democrats for Keating". Among them were journalists, writers (including B. Touchman) and actors. In a statement, the committee said :" We cannot support Robert Kennedy in the election... He is an opponent of liberals and a man with very dangerous authoritarian tendencies." Perhaps they were guided by such thoughts, but others sought to defeat R. Kennedy in a different way, In the midst of the campaign F. Copell's pamphlet "The Strange Death of Marilyn Monroe"was published. In a little over 70 pages, it was proved that the actress was killed by R. Kennedy in collusion with the" communists", because he failed in his love harassment of the"queen of sex".
The election campaign was expensive. On September 18, the New York Times reported: "Kennedy's strategists are going to spend $ 1 to $ 1.5 million on her... Mr. Kennedy must raise or pay for almost the entire election fund himself." Accurate calculations were not made at the end of the election, but it is known that only about a million dollars were spent on paying for R. Kennedy's speeches on television. Publisher Stone quipped on the eve of the election: "Voting for Kennedy doesn't just mean voting for a senator. He acts as if the country owes him the White House. " 5 In November 1964, Kennedy was elected to the New York State Senate by a majority of 719,693 votes. L. Johnson was elected president in this state by a majority of 2666597 votes. Speaking after the election, Robert said that the results "represent a strong mandate in favor of the policies of John F. Kennedy and, of course, Lyndon Johnson." 6
Since 1965, R. Kennedy has served in the U.S. Senate. He remodeled the office that Keating had given him as a prize, and put up a huge stuffed Bengal tiger. Immediately, the wits drew a parallel between the beast and the new senator. "Remove the tiger!" Robert ordered in frustration and turned to business. He wholeheartedly supported the great society program of L. Johnson. If Senator R. Kennedy disagreed with the administration, it was mainly about the amount of appropriations needed for social security, poor relief, slum clearance, etc. He demanded an increase in them, hoping to get the votes of these voters in the future. In 1966, he proposed that the automobile industry spend 5 percent. their profits for equipping cars with devices that ensure traffic safety. In August 1967, Robert accused a number of banks and department stores of advertising consumer credit by "resorting to deception." He constantly attacked the tobacco industry for "pushing death" for profit, and introduced three bills to restrict the sale of tobacco products. In connection with the Negro riots in the summer of 1965. Kennedy said emphatically: "There is no point in saying to Negroes: obey the law... because for many Negroes the law is the enemy." In the field of labor law, the senator advocated for the repeal of the hated section 14-6 of the Taft-Hartley Act, which allows states to abolish the "closed shop", that is, practically nullifying the importance of the union in hiring and firing from work. The AFL - CPP Political Education Committee found that Kennedy always " voted 100 percent for the unions." These and many other acts of R. Kennedy on the podium made him a reputation as a liberal. By 1968, Americans for Democratic Action found that Kennedy was one of only two senators in the current congressional staff who had "fully scored as liberals."
He was in a great hurry: he talked, talked, referred to authorities. Robert once remarked to a group of senators: "When describing the wars of the ancient world, one of their generals, Tacitus, said..." The senators were perplexed: until now they considered Tacitus a historian. Robert's political activities were changing him before his eyes. Once he showed his hand to a journalist and explained that because of the handshakes, his right palm became wider than the left. "But," Robert added,"my brother's was even wider." The senator remained loyal
5 "J. F. Stone's bi-Weekly". October 19, 1964.
6 "United States News and World Report", May 6, 1968, p. 53.
page 130
his former habit of judging foreign policy issues based on personal impressions. Back in 1955, together with Supreme Court Justice W. Douglas, he visited the Soviet Union. "The trip to Russia," Douglas said, " was his father's idea, and he asked me to take Robert. The trip took seven weeks. Bobby didn't talk much, but he was very observant and generally made for a pleasant company. The trip to Russia shocked him. We were brought up in a closed society where everything communist is considered evil. However, when Robert fell ill in Siberia and the temperature jumped over 40 degrees, a Russian female doctor sat by his bedside for 36 hours and saved his life." After returning from the Soviet Union, Robert, in conversations with close friends, began to express that the United States does not yet contain the whole world.
During his years in the Senate, Kennedy undertook three major foreign tours - to Europe, South Africa, and Latin America. In the Latin American countries he visited in late 1966, the senator saw appalling living conditions. He remarked to a planter: "You are preparing your own destruction with your own hands. If you don't pay a decent salary, you are undermining your own society." He was not driven by sentimental impulses, but by a sober calculation. After visiting the coal mines in Chile, where coal was mined under the ocean floor, he asked the manager directly: "If you worked there as a simple miner, would you become a communist?" After a moment's hesitation, he answered in the affirmative. Kennedy summed it up unequivocally: "If I worked in this mine, I would also be a Communist." 7
When Kennedy returned to the United States, he boasted of how he had brought the truth to the natives living south of the Rio Grande. Speaking in New York at a conference dedicated to developing countries, he said that he described the American economy during the trip as" electric socialism": "Not because it is such, but because for them such a term will sound more accurate than the free enterprise system." However, the term went unnoticed in the audience. Only later did it turn out that the typist had mistakenly written "electric" instead of "eclectic"when typing the speech. The speaker read text 8 without hesitation . But after all, he'd never been a scientist.
As for the essence of the speeches, their philosophy was basically familiar: formulated by J. R. R. Tolkien. Edited slightly by Robert's advisers. The sum of the latter's views on US foreign policy was reduced to three provisions: ensuring the country's power sufficient to "achieve American interests", and "it is necessary to have the wisdom not to use this power directly and indiscriminately"; spreading in the world "an understanding of what the United States stands for"; the struggle against communism should be waged through "the use of the Unitedprogressive practical programs that eliminate the misery, poverty, and discontent that it thrives on." Not too complicated theoretical calculations. Nevertheless, R. Kennedy considered them worthy of special books. In his book Achieving Justice, he said: "Moscow remains energetic and vigilant, and its challenge to our freedom is dangerous and constant. The calendar of communist plans is designed for decades, not weeks." How to prevent these plans? According to R. Kennedy, "different reactions" are required. In his opinion, the basis of the basics is as follows: "Although we have achieved some success, we have not mastered the art of counter-guerrilla actions... We have not perfected the technique of training the subjects of other states to fight against communism... This type of war can be extremely long and costly, but it is necessary. " 9 A journalist who interviewed Kennedy in early 1967 concluded:: "Kennedy is not for ending the cold War, but for waging it with new, sophisticated methods." 10 The novelty, however, is questionable.
In the second half of the twentieth century, R. Kennedy restated the traditional foreign policy principle of the American bourgeoisie: to fight with someone else's hands, adhering to the well-known principle of "balance of power". It was from this position that he approached the Viet Nam War-
7 M. Laing. Robert Kennedy. L. 1968, pp. 124, 218 - 219.
8 V. Lasky. Robert F. Kennedy. The Myth and the Man. N. Y. 1968, pp. 21 - 22.
9 R. Kennedy. The Pursuit of Justice. N. Y. 1967, pp. 110, 129 - 130.
10 "Ramparts", February 1967, p. 16.
page 131
on the map, which turned out to be a convenient excuse for a flanking maneuver against the administration of L. Johnson-a detour from the left. That the war was unpopular in the country was beyond doubt, as was the fact that Senator Kennedy dutifully voted for all government appropriations for its conduct. The paths of Kennedy and the Johnson administration began to diverge around the turn of 1965-1966, when Washington sent large contingents of American troops to Vietnam. Kennedy saw this as a violation of the age-old principles of US foreign policy, which suddenly took on the entire burden of military operations. The progressive forces of the country, who protested against the Vietnam adventure for completely different reasons, objectively turned out to be on his side.
Although in the early 60s, R. Kennedy was at the origin of the aggression in Vietnam, its scope, at least for him, was unforeseen. In 1962, the Minister of Justice wrote:: "We will win in Vietnam. We will stay there until we win... I think the American people understand and fully support this struggle. " 11 He spoke differently now. In a speech on February 19, 1966, Kennedy called for a negotiated end to the war, providing for the National Liberation Front of South Vietnam to have "a share of power and responsibility" in the new Government.
Johnson was furious and summoned the senator to the White House. The president used the familiar slang of Texas cattle dealers: "If you dare to say that again, you will lose your political future in the country... In the next six months, all of you pigeons will be destroyed... I don't want to hear your views on Vietnam anymore, and I don't want to see you again." Robert, in turn, called the president a "scoundrel" and ended the conversation with the phrase: "I don't want to sit here and eat this shit." 12 They hadn't seen much of each other since, but they'd questioned each other with keen curiosity: Robert, who had returned from the White House, "What he said about me," and Johnson, "How's Baby Kennedy?" The President paid the former Minister of Justice in full. "That coward" Johnson, Robert used to tell friends, gave orders to eavesdrop on the senator's phone conversations .13 However, according to the principle of an eye for an eye ,the "Kennedy people" reviled the president, the latter's supporters did not remain in debt. They referred to Robert with obscene epithets like "liberal fascist," and the most popular appeal of the professional sycophants crowding the White House was: "For God and the motherland, forward to Kennedy!" 14 .
Meanwhile, Robert, having discovered a gold mine of political growth - the Vietnam War, tirelessly exploited it. In a speech in New York on August 23, 1967, he said that the elections in South Vietnam were a hoax, and in Chicago on February 9, 1968, he argued that the United States could not win a war there. To one friend, he remarked: "I tried everything I could to stop the war, but Johnson cannot be stopped." 15 And life went on as usual. Robert grew increasingly bored with the measured life of the Senate, and annoyed with parliamentary procedure. In the summer of 1966, while attending a meeting of the committee of which he was a member, R. Kennedy spent some time following the debate of respectable senators over some wording of the resolution. Finally, he jumped up and yelled: "Oh, hell, toss a coin-heads or tails?" he stormed out of the room. They remembered that even when he was Minister of Justice, he could not stand the Senate's verbal disputes; in August 1961, he was exposed from the Senate gallery: chewing gum.
Robert's earlier optimism was gradually giving way to a tragic fatalism. He reads the works of the aesthete philosopher and writer Camus; finds that Aeschylus, who introduced the tragic hero to literature, is his "favorite poet". If earlier, in the midst of the 1964 campaign, a phrase like " But what does it matter what I decide to do? Perhaps we are all already doomed" was a rarity for him, but by the end of 1967, such statements were heard more often and interspersed with bouts of silent, painful despondency: "I can't sit back and wonder if what I'm going to do now will hurt me in the political situation of 1972. Who knows,
11 R. Kennedy. Just Friends and Brave Enemies. N. Y. 1962, p. 10.
12 M. Laing. Op. cit., p. 222.
13 J. Newfield. Robert Kennedy. A Memoir. N. Y. 1969, p. 181.
14 E. Goldman. Op. cit., p. 19.
15 T. White. The Making of the President 1968. N. Y. 1969, p. 74.
page 132
Will I be alive in 1972?" And he ended his thoughts with a stereotypical maxim: "I do not know what to do if I don't get elected president."
The idea of the presidency haunted him like a doom. He wanted to win back the White House for his clan by returning President Kennedy to the Americans. "Obedience will be easier to understand," he wrote in Achieving Justice. "Americans are a wonderful people when it comes to doing what's required of them. I hope that the next lecture (not a sermon!)will follow. it will help clarify what is expected of them." And this was written for the information of the democratic (which it considers itself) American nation! R. Kennedy was sure that in any case, the meeting of the people with him, sitting in the presidential chair, is inevitable. The "government-in-exile" began to gather around him, including those who wanted the Kennedy administration to return to power. The" brain trust " of the coming administration has been operating since the fall of 1966, when events unprecedented in the history of Harvard University took place. The Kennedy Libraries Corporation has donated $ 3.5 million to the Graduate School of Public Administration so that the institution will now be named after John F. Kennedy. Never before in the history of the university has any of its institutions been named after a patron of art.
Most importantly, the corporation also donated $ 10 million to establish the Institute of Politics as part of this graduate program. On the advisory committee set up to run the institute, one seat was permanently reserved for the Kennedy family. The funds for the foundation of these organizations were mostly not owned by the family itself, but were made up of donations from thousands of Americans who wanted to perpetuate the memory of the deceased president. However, when the institute opened its doors, it became obvious that a "brain trust" had grown up under the brand of an academic institution, serving the needs of R. Kennedy. In the press, the idea was expressed that the primordial canons were openly violated. Politics has once again more than imperiously invaded the university sphere. The leaders of the new institutions-D. Price, Director of the Graduate School, R. Neustadt, Director of the Institute of Politics, and A. Harriman, Chairman of the Institute's advisory committee - vigorously refuted the "insinuations". The Kennedy family, on the other hand, remained suitably silent, leaving the professors gathered at the institute to scold them. The professors did a good job of proving the respectability of the latest changes in the reserve of academic freedoms, which is traditionally revered by Harvard. An anonymous satirical poet responded:
Give up your hopes of bribing
Political scientist
And look at what he does,
Being an incorruptible critic.
It will become clear to everyone here, friends,
That you'd be wasting your money.
Whatever the case, Kennedy's" cult of personality " has gained a solid base. Since 1966, Robert has already behaved as a presidential candidate (of course, without officially announcing it). In the Capitol, out of 100 senators, he had the largest staff of the secretariat and office - about 50 people. Meanwhile, the senator was explaining which way the United States should go. His speeches were larger in caliber than the post of speaker. He spoke like a president already enjoying power, of course, "strong", knowing better and more than others. The future United States was seen by R. Kennedy as a tightly united nation, united by a single goal. He understood that the backbone of the state is the economy. How to move it further? "We must develop enlightenment and education - the main capital of a technological society." The Defense Minister once said: "Contracts are made with those who have minds," and for good reason. 80 percent of our industrial growth in the twentieth century was not the result of capital investment or population growth, but the result of invention and rationalization. And invention and rationalization are a direct consequence of the state of enlightenment and education that is achieved in great universities by the people who study there" (speech at the Syracuse Chamber of Commerce on April 21, 1965). R. Kennedy warned that the responsibility in our time is no more and no less than to "lead the revolution": "A revolution that will lead the revolution."
page 133
it will be peaceful if we are wise, humane if we take care of it, successful if we are lucky; but the revolution will come whether we want it or not "(Newsweek, November 22, 1965), " The revolution is coming regardless of our desire... The question is how revolutions are made and managed" (Commonwealth, June 3, 1966).
The senator was going to ride the revolution for certain purposes: "Communism must ultimately be defeated by progressive political programs that eliminate poverty, misery, and discontent" (speech at the California Institute of Technology on June 8, 1964). This thesis was constantly developed by R. Kennedy. Speaking on October 11, 1966, on the occasion of Columbus Day in New York, the senator revealed: "Our true interest is to help create a world order that will replace and improve the order that was shaken by the First World War, which opened the doors of the twentieth century." This is where his nostalgia broke through: before that war, there were no socialist states in the world! To bring humanity back; to turn the clock of history back to the time before 1917 on the basis of a new technology; to move forward in technology, but reverse in the field of social relations - this is the essence of R. Kennedy's views. From this point of view, Robert also considered the reign of his deceased brother. When asked what the highest achievement of the thousand days of the John F. Kennedy administration is, he explained: "The main thing is to restore the American people's self-confidence, faith in our ideals and confidence that we will be able to fulfill what is required of us. Over the years, particularly as a result of Soviet advances in space and the constant claims that communism is the wave of the future, this belief has spread. I think he turned the tide. " 16 This is how Robert F. Smith's political thinking evolved. Kennedy. "The rigidity of his judgments," notes T. White, "was such that to the outside world he was presented as a man with dictatorial habits." 17 Nevertheless, many bowed their heads, for the belief was widespread in the country: Whatever you do, the Kennedy inevitability can't be overturned.
When Kennedy appeared at the Capitol on March 16, 1968, at the head of a team of his wife, nine children, and staff, and announced his candidacy for president, it was no surprise. The" Kennedy Legend " has regained its flesh and blood: in 1960, D. Kennedy made the same statement here. Justifying his decision, R. Kennedy pointed out: "What is at stake is not just the leadership of our party and even our country, but our right to moral leadership of this planet." And on March 20, Americans were offered a revised and expanded edition of R. Kennedy's book "Finding a New World", originally published at the end of 1967. That was his campaign credo. The boring book, which took up 235 pages, did not shine too much in style, but was replete with quotations from philosophers and public figures of ancient Greece. Sarcastic liberal critics, having mastered the work of the senator, found that the fee of 150 thousand dollars was too big. What was paid for? They argued that the periphrasis of speeches from the "Congressional Record" does not correspond to the concept of belles lettres.
The book opened with a chapter addressed to young people. The author developed the thesis that a society that lives for profit cannot ignite the younger generation. The world of profit has no lofty ideals, R. Kennedy argued.
Without questioning the main foreign policy course of the United States, he popularized the most rational, from his point of view, methods of action. "We did not build the United States on anti - communism," the senator said. "Our power comes from positive faith. We don't need to fear or hate our opponents... If we want to minimize the damage and danger of revolution, we must focus on social improvement programs." Therefore, more flexibility is needed, and we need to move away from tough positions, especially with regard to China. "We need to understand that not all aspects of China's expanding influence threaten us." Again, in a cautious form, the author suggested that you follow the-
16 D. Rоss. Op. cil, pp. 313, 251, 379, 432, 352, 397, 336, 32, 352, 24.
17 White. Op. cit., p. 152.
18 V. Lasky. Op. cit., p. 22.
page 134
"I was associated," Kennedy admitted, " with many of the early decisions about Vietnam that helped put us on the path of our current politics. Perhaps our efforts were doomed from the start... In that case - and this is very likely-I want to take my share of responsibility to history and my fellow citizens. However, past mistakes are no excuse for repeating them." Analyzing the reasons for the US failures in Vietnam, Kennedy insisted that the Americans made a major mistake, turning a political problem into a military one. In addition, no social reforms have been implemented in South Vietnam, so its people are opposed to the Saigon regime. "Guns and bombs cannot fill empty stomachs, educate children, build homes, heal the sick," the senator concluded.
The Vietnam War has turned into an American war, and the main losses and costs are borne by the United States. The corrupt South Vietnamese authorities are not conducting it properly, and there is nothing to be done about it. Where is the exit? The US withdrawal from Vietnam, according to R. Kennedy, is "now completely impossible" for many reasons, if only because the Saigon regime in this case "will not last even a month." At the same time, a complete victory cannot be achieved, and it is not necessary in the national interests of the United States. "The only road to peace is political compromise." At the end of the book, the author recalled: "If Athens seems great to you, said Pericles, consider that its glory was won by outstanding people who knew what their duty was." 19 The author didn't say too much in his book. And that, in his opinion, was all that was needed. Unless we once again confirm our commitment to the cause of youth and declare the need to end the Vietnam War... As for the subsequent election campaign, the main concern is to convince people to vote for themselves.
And so Robert appealed to the youth, claiming that they should play a decisive role in the elections. And what else? The question remained open. Otherwise, how can we explain the astounding tactics of his campaign speeches? Robert would walk to the podium and address the crowd:
- Will you vote for me?
- yes! - shout in the crowd.
- Would you advise your friends to vote for me?
- yes!
- When you hear something bad about me, will you deny it?
- yes!
"Have you read my book?"
- yes!
"You're lying!
Since the second half of March 1968, R. Kennedy has been plunged into the maelstrom of primary elections, the outcome of which was largely decided at the Democratic Party convention. The campaign was being conducted in a country torn apart by political passions. On April 4, Martin Luther King was assassinated. R. Kennedy pays for a jet plane designed to transport the body of a Black rights activist from Memphis to Atlanta. A disconsolate senator in mourning appears at the funeral. Impressive actions, touching and exciting spectacle.
And it was necessary to show up here with another article to the restless D. Pearson. He unearthed that in 1963, Justice Secretary R. Kennedy ordered secret surveillance of Martin Luther King, whose telephone conversations were overheard. R. Kennedy did not deny the facts obtained by Pearson, but tried in every possible way to evade a direct answer. During the televised debate, Senator Yu. McCarthy asked me to explain the situation. Robert explained that as Attorney General, he had issued surveillance orders in cases where "national security"was involved. He added that the law forbids him to discuss the case in detail.
19 R. Kennedy. To Seek a Newer World. N. Y. 1968, pp. 76, 144 - 145, 160, 102, 167, 186, 168, 229, 232 - 233.
page 135
The intensity of the campaign was growing, and more and more harsh epithets were being used. Hippies gathered in San Francisco described Kennedy as a " fascist pig." Well-wishers told him about the need for security. He replied: "It is absolutely impossible to protect a candidate during the election campaign. You have to put yourself at the mercy of the crowd and rely on your own luck." He declined the offer of a secondment of police protection, and ordered his personal bodyguards not to carry weapons. The usual accusations during all the Kennedy family outings in the political arena: they "buy up" the election. The mother answers for Robert. Rose Kennedy tells the nation with disconcerting candor: "This is our money, and we spend it however we want. This is all part of the campaign business. If you have money, you spend it and win. And the more you can afford, the more you spend. The Rockefellers are like us. Our families have a lot of money for campaigns. This is not regulated. Therefore, there is nothing unethical in such spending." As early as March 25, 1968, the Washington Post and Times Herald noted: "Employees (p. Kennedy - N. Y.) travel around the country using Joseph P.'s credit cards. Kennedy and various family businesses." So, not only cash, but also credit. The consequences were not slow to affect.
The campaign, which had begun rather sluggishly, quickly changed course: triumph after triumph. There is a clear preponderance of R. Kennedy over his rivals-Vice President G. Humphrey and Senator Yu. McCarthy. The senator was simply explaining his advantages. "Other candidates," he said, for example, to farmers, " will come here and tell you how much they will do for farmers. But I'm already doing more for farmers than any of them. If you don't believe me, check my table at lunch or breakfast any day of the week. We consume more milk, more bread, and more eggs (thereby contributing to the marketing of agricultural products) than any other candidate's family. I challenge two other Democratic candidates to try to match me by the day of the primary election!"
Kennedy tries to convince himself that he is a great friend of the little man. In a Black ghetto in Washington, he is greeted with the words " our blue-eyed godbrother." In Columbus, Ohio, Robert is dragged out of his car by frantic fans. He was forced out of the hands of a friendly crowd, without cufflinks, in a torn shirt. In Watts, the site of recent bloody racial clashes, he is greeted by a placard reading " Make way for the President of the United States!". R. Kennedy solemnly proclaims: "I am the only candidate against whom big capital and big labor (the trade union leadership - N. Y.) turned against". " See what sacrifices I made to become president? he shouts into the microphones, pointing at his forehead. "I cut the forelock!" The joy of meetings... They didn't prepare, of course. Except that in San Francisco, California, they noticed that Kennedy employees who arrived earlier than the candidate offered $ 25 apiece for a "homemade" welcome poster.
Kennedy wins in Indiana, Nebraska, South Dakota, and the District of Columbia. He preaches boldness and realism. The only defeat was in Oregon. The reason, according to a Kennedy aide, is this: in this affluent state with a white population, "we scared them." In early June, R. Kennedy performs in the largest state-California. He collects 46 percent of votes here, 42 percent. given for Y. McCarthy. A win in California almost certainly makes him the Democratic presidential nominee. After analyzing the tactics of R. Kennedy's incomplete election campaign, T. White stated:: "In short, from the point of view of the program, what he stood for was not much different from the program of Richard Nixon." But White sees a difference in the behavior of the candidates: R. Kennedy was presented as a "troublemaker". He spoke to those who had a bad life. "When he appeared in front of Negroes, or Mexicans, or Indians, or any distressed groups, he was not a cold Bobby-no, there was a Deliverer on horseback. His whole being shouted: the goal of power and government is to take care of them, and it does not matter what political or physical danger stands in his way."20
On the evening of June 5, 1968, R. Kennedy received congratulations at the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles. He didn't look young or handsome: there were bags under his eyes,
20 T. White. Op. cit., pp. 172. 179, 174.
page 136
sharp wrinkles, gray hair. Robert shook hands absently, gathering his thoughts as he prepared for another press conference. He knew that he was going to have a new meeting with H. Humphrey and a new struggle with him. Now not for my brother, but for myself. He just told his friends: "I will be chasing fat-bellied Hubert Humphrey all over America. I'll follow this fat guy to all the constituencies. Wherever he shows up, I'll be right there." And Robert expressed the same message to the congratulations in appropriate terms: "I hope that the preliminary elections in the state of California can be considered left behind. Now a dialogue, or discussion, will open up between the Vice President and myself regarding the future path of the country." "Give it to them!" the fans shouted in unison.
He was smiling tiredly: he had to talk again and again, and still talk about the same thing, and then tell the journalists who were waiting for him in another room of the hotel. The crowd flooded the building. The idea was born to go through the service passage, past the kitchen. Just after 12 a.m., R. Kennedy, accompanied by his wife, unarmed bodyguards, friends, and journalists, entered a gloomy room: a corridor-like room; a wet cement floor; a long galvanized counter on the left, and a row of refrigerators on the right. Kennedy paused (a ritual handshake with the dish washer). Before he could pull his hand away, shots rang out. The young man leaned his elbow on the counter and fired at Robert at point-blank range. The distance was just over a meter. Robert fell. They attacked the shooter, but they couldn't get the gun out, and he kept pulling the trigger. In the dense crowd, bullets wounded five more people. Finally, eight men leaned on the assailant, literally crucified him on the counter, broke his index finger and pulled out their weapons.
Gasping under the weight of those holding him, the boy screamed: "Why did I do this? I'll explain. Let me speak!" No one was listening to him, the crowd was arriving. With difficulty, they managed to push them away from the assailant. Someone called out to reason,"We don't need another Oswald." The senator was sprawled on his back on the muddy floor, surrounded by a group of friends. Ethel struggled to her husband's side, leaning down to whisper something. There was no reply. At 12.30 pm. The senator, who was bleeding profusely, was taken to the hospital. They found that he was wounded by two bullets. One went through the soft tissue of his forearm and lodged under the skin of his neck, and the other hit him in the head behind his right ear. X-rays were taken and the operation began: trepanation of the skull, futile attempts to remove the smallest fragments of bullet and bone that had penetrated the brain. The operation lasted 3 hours and 40 minutes.
The police questioned the detainee. He chatted nonchalantly, but refused to identify himself or describe what had happened at the Ambassador Hotel. Fingerprints were checked, but the detainee was not listed in the file. During the search, they seized a little over $ 400, a car key, and a newspaper clipping - D. Lawrence's article " Kennedy stands up for Israel." At 7: 30 a.m., without admitting outsiders, the arrested man was charged with murder and sent to prison, placing him in a strictly isolated cell. 100 people were allocated for security. Two of his jailers were always with him. The arrestee was quickly identified by the gun number: Sol Sirhan, a 24-year-old Jordanian citizen who had lived in Los Angeles with his four brothers, sister and mother since 1956. The justice authorities refrained from official comments: first you need to conduct an investigation 21 . On 6 June, the Minister of Justice contented himself with saying: "There is no evidence of a conspiracy; all indications are that this is an act of solitary confinement." 22 As for the police, they completely absolved themselves of responsibility for the tragedy, bringing it to the attention of the press.: "We weren't there because we weren't needed. Senator Kennedy has repeatedly told us that he doesn't want any police officers anywhere near him."
Robert Kennedy survived the entire day of June 6, but his condition worsened by the hour. 25 hours after the attempt, he died without regaining consciousness. The senator's body was flown to New York, where mass was celebrated, then loaded onto a funeral train, transported to Washington, and on the evening of June 8, buried on the Ar-
21 "Time", June 14, 1968, p. 14.
22 "The New York Times", 6.VI.1968.
page 137
Lington Cemetery, near John F. Kennedy's grave. Robert F. Kennedy's political career ended. He never managed to utter the words of Aeschylus that he loved so much:"When you get to a height, it will be easy."
The new tragedy was the center of attention in the American press. On the cover of the most popular magazine "Life" was a picture of R. Kennedy dying; on the last page, against the background of a glass of brown liquid, an advertisement was placed: "Life is better with Coca-Cola. Always invigorating. The taste will never get tired. Drink Coca-Cola!" The article about the death of R. Kennedy was titled: "The Kennedy family-princes who are destroyed by the gods." Another article describing his death ended with a conversation between two Americans: "Why was Robert Kennedy killed? "" They shoot at the stars!" "Yes, a star really fell that night," 23 the magazine concluded melancholy.
The grief over the death of R. Kennedy was partially replaced by new concerns. Edward Kennedy moved the painting "Destroyer Joseph Patrick Kennedy Jr." from his dead brother's office to his office in the Capitol. Ethel was busy raising her children and running a large household. I need to finish paying off my debts for Robert's 1968 campaign. By the spring of 1969, $ 2 million of the $ 3.5 million debt had been repaid, including an invoice of $ 85,000 from the Ambassador Hotel. The library of books about R. Kennedy has already begun to be completed. Those who sympathized with him discovered more and more attractive features in him. The editor of Harper's Magazine, D. Halberstam, in his book" The Unfinished Odyssey of Robert Kennedy, " discovered that he was, in fact, Hamlet, tormented by passions, mostly good. The journalist D. Whitkover found R. Kennedy's likeness to the heroes of ancient Greek tragedies. Another journalist, D. Newfield, goes further. He traces the evolution of the hero from a supporter of McCarthyism to a defender of the disadvantaged 24 .
T. Sorensen, as an old friend and colleague, found it possible to publicly compare the two Kennedy brothers with each other. In late 1969, Sorensen published The Kennedy Legacy, essentially a quasi-philosophical treatise on John and Robert. He immensely promoted the activities of the deceased and their ideas. But if it was easy for the author to write about the president, because 1000 days of government gave a lot of materials, then with R. Kennedy he had a harder time. Sorensen used mysticism, asking me to take his word for it. "The loss of Robert F. Kennedy is all the more upsetting," he argued, " because we have lost more than a mere copy of John F. Kennedy. We have lost a unique person with their own ideas and ideals and great future potential." Sorensen kept saying that Robert F. Kennedy changed "in the last years of his life, which was not noticed by outsiders, his sense of compassion and liberalism increased." Eventually, he "visited Indian reservations, seasonal camps, and tenant huts in the Mississippi Delta that John never visited." 25
On the contrary, V. Lasky, who treats the Kennedy family coolly, to put it mildly, devoted a large book to Robert's life path and already collected a lot of unflattering reviews about the deceased in the introductory article. He recalled that the protest singer and troubadour of the New Left, Phil Oke, said of Robert: "Bobby reminds me of a good gangster." To those liberals who posthumously see Robert as a like-minded person, Lasky recalled the senator's review of them. After seeing Liberals flock to his banner during the 1968 campaign, Robert commented:: "Disgusting beards"; "Needed like a healthy nail below the back" 26 . Of course, it was not said for their ears then...
6. The District Attorney's Way of the Cross
In November 1966, New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison suddenly stopped being available to visitors. He was gone. As it turned out, Garrison had begun his own investigation into the assassination of President J. R. R. Tolkien. Kennedy, Istra-
23 "Life", June 23, 1968, pp. 33, 22.
24 D. Halberstam. The Unfinished Odyssea of Robert Kennedy. N. Y. 1969; Y. Witcover. 85 Days - the Last Campaign of Robert Kennedy. N. Y. 1969; J. Newfield. Op. cit.
25 T. Sorensen. The Kennedy Legacy. N. Y. 1969, pp. 257, 264, 261.
26 V. Lasky. Op. cit., pp. 12 - 13.
page 138
tiv for three months is 8 thousand dollars. On February 18, 1967, the prosecutor's imprisonment came to an end. He called a press conference. His statement caused a sensation: "We are investigating the role of the city of New Orleans in the assassination of President Kennedy and have made progress, I think significant progress." After a pause and waiting out the excitement of the journalists, he added: "And one more thing: there will be arrests." On the same day, 49-year-old D. Ferry, a former pilot, told the press that Garrison "attracted" him to the case of the assassination of the president. On February 22, Ferry was found dead in his apartment. The official conclusion is suicide. Garrison commented: "We have decided to arrest him early next week. Obviously, we've waited too long."
A new death in connection with the case of J. R. R. Tolkien. Kennedy stirred up public opinion. Indeed, a number of people who could have been witnesses died partly violently, partly "naturally". By the summer of 1969, according to the Paris weekly L'Express, their number had exceeded 30 people .27 Harrison readily explained what had prompted him to investigate: Oswald had lived in New Orleans for six months before the president's assassination, where he had met a number of people, including Ferry. On behalf of the Warren Commission, they were questioned by the New Orleans District Attorney's Office and released. The FBI also concluded that they were completely innocent of the tragedy in Dallas. A second investigation by Garrison led him to conclude that they were complicit in the assassination of the president. On March 1, 1967, Garrison arrested New Orleans businessman Clay Shaw. The arrest was symbolic. Shaw was summoned to the prosecutor's office, announced that he was under arrest, fingerprinted, handcuffed, photographed in this form by correspondents, and in the evening of the same day, having taken away his recognizance not to leave, was released on bail of 10 thousand dollars. The District Prosecutor's office gave the press a statement: "Shaw has been arrested and will be charged with conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy."28 . Shaw, of course, completely denied the charge against him.
On March 2, Garrison claimed that Clay Shaw was actually "Bertrand". The discovery of the district attorney was extremely interesting to the press: an employee of the prosecutor's office of New Orleans, D. Andrews, at one time testified that "Bertrand" was a friend of Oswald. The Warren commission found no trace of the Bertrand. On March 14, Shaw appeared at the administrative court hearing. Three judges had to decide whether there was sufficient evidence to bring him to trial. Shaw, 60, listened to the testimony of Ferry's 25-year-old friend, insurance agent P. Rosso, who said that in September 1963 he was present at Ferry's apartment. The landlord conspired with Oswald and "Bertrand" to kill President Kennedy. After undergoing a course of hypnotic suggestion, and undergoing injections of "truth serum", Rosso identified the Show as "Bertrand". Another witness, W. Bundy, a well-known drug addict, testified that he saw with his own eyes that in the summer of 1963, the city was destroyed. Shaw gave Oswald a large sum of money. After a four-day hearing, the court ruled on 17 March that there were grounds for bringing K. to trial. Show on charges of conspiracy to assassinate the president. On March 22, the jury confirmed the court's findings. Garrison won: for the first time, investigating the murder of J. R. R. Tolkien. M. Lane, having heard about the exciting events, hurried to New Orleans. He became friends with Garrison and began to give him all the help he could. Fifty wealthy entrepreneurs in New Orleans, led by oil magnate D. Rault, formed the Truth Committee, which undertook to finance the costs of the investigation planned by the District Attorney. 29 The investment promised an unheard-of political profit - exposing low-level murderers! - as well as the growth of personal popularity, which is equally important for businessmen.
America was talking about Garrison. A public opinion poll conducted in May 1967 found that 66 percent of Americans believe that there was a plot to assassinate the president, and "the main factor that contributed to the appearance of these catfish-
27 "Literaturnaya gazeta", 17. VI. 1968.
28 J. Kirkwood. So Here You Are, Cley Show. "Esquire", December, 1968, p. 221.
29 P. Flammonde. The Kennedy Conspiracy. An Uncommissioned Report on the Jim Garrison Investigaton. N. Y. 1969, pp. 5 - 7.
page 139
nen, " investigation of the murder by District Attorney Jim Garrison in New Orleans." Along the way, the media covered Garrison's life in detail. In World War II, he was a pilot of a spotter plane, took part in combat operations, in 1950 he served in the FBI, then fought in Korea, after being discharged from the army, he worked in the prosecutor's office of New Orleans, in the early 60s he was elected to the post of district attorney. During the political struggle in the state, opponents of Garrison in 1964 announced the conclusion of psychiatrists from 1951, on the basis of which he was dismissed: "psychoneurosis", expressed in the so-called "Napoleon complex". Garrison then publicly stated that in 1951 he was simply tired of the military situation, and the announcement of a medical report by opponents should be qualified as a federal crime-disclosure of the contents of a military document, which is punishable by imprisonment and a fine of 10 thousand dollars.
New Orleans reporters wrote :" From the day Garrison became District attorney, he never hid his ambitious political plans. He has said many times that he wants to be a senator. " 30 The press reported that Garrison was aiming for a higher post: to become Vice President of the United States if the investigation is successful. The district attorney angrily denied the insinuations, pointing out that he was looking only for the truth, and it alone. When news of the New Orleans investigation reached Washington, Justice Secretary Robert Clark, Kennedy's successor, criticized the District Attorney for not cooperating with the department. Garrison answered from New Orleans: "I am investigating, not the president or the Minister of Justice. We're investigating a conspiracy that apparently took place in New Orleans, and it's none of their business. If they want to help me, I would welcome that help. But I'm not accountable to anyone." A serious statement that indicated serious intentions. Interest in Garrison was growing. Playboy magazine published a lengthy interview with him in October 1967.
The district attorney was a very talkative man. He gave his assessment of the main trends in the development of the United States. According to Garrison, they face "the enormous danger of becoming a fascist-type state. This state will be different from Germany; there fascism grew out of the depression, promising bread and work, and our fascism, paradoxically, grows out of prosperity. However, it is ultimately based on strength... A touchstone for testing - what happens to us with a dissenter. In Nazi Germany, it was subject to physical destruction. Our process is more subtle, but the results are similar... Based on my own experience, I fear that fascism will come to America in the name of national security." Curious people from the Playboy editorial staff tried to find out from Garrison everything about the mysterious assassination of President Kennedy and the subsequent investigation. Garrison revealed to them that J. R. R. Tolkien was a very good man. Ruby knew Oswald, K. Shaw, D. Ferry, was friends with General E. Walker (who, according to Garrison, was" up to his neck " in the plot to assassinate the president), knew Policeman Tippit, and worked with the CIA. As for the possibility of Ruby's violent death, the district attorney's opinion was as follows: "I can neither confirm nor deny it, because I have no data to support the first or second. But we've identified a rather strange hobby of Dafydd Ferry: apart from his ballistics hobby, he was also involved in cancer research... In my opinion, it is noteworthy that Jack Ruby died of cancer a few weeks after the appeals court overturned the verdict in his case and he had to stand trial outside of Dallas. This way, if he wanted to, he could speak freely. I will add that Lee Oswald was killed without hesitation to prevent him from speaking. Therefore, there is no reason to doubt that the leaders of the conspiracy had more reason to spare Ruby in case he posed a danger to them."
What are the motives for the murder of J. R. R. Tolkien? Kennedy? Garrison replied: "President Kennedy was assassinated for one reason - he sought reconciliation with the USSR and Cuba
30 R. Jaraes, J. Wardlaw. Plot or Politics? New Orleans. 1967, p. 30.
page 140
Castro." Garrison reconstructed the scene of the gruesome crime. The President was killed by seven people, with four shooting and three picking up shell casings. Of course., " one man shot from the book warehouse building, but it wasn't Oswald." Shots were fired from both the front and rear, but the fatal shot that blew off part of the president's skull came from a manhole located in front and to the right of the president's cars. "It was a precise operation, executed in cold blood and perfectly coordinated. The killers even kept in touch with each other on the radio"31 . In another interview broadcast on Dallas television on December 9, 1967, the District attorney explained that he and his men had searched the sewer system under the plaza where Kennedy was killed and found it "very convenient"to shoot from the manhole. The Warren Commission, he said, "knew that bullets hit the president from the front at least twice... The Commission deceived the American people intentionally and knowingly ... " 32 .
The new year, 1968, opened with a huge article in Ramparts magazine: "The Harrison Commission to Investigate the Assassination of President Kennedy." On the cover is a portrait of the prosecutor, under the portrait are the words of Garrison: "Who appointed Ramsay Clark and did everything to disrupt the investigation? Who controls the CIA? Who controls the FBI? Who controls the archives and keeps them so locked up that when the materials are released, no one sitting in this room will be alive? And they are your property and the property of the people of our country. Who is so arrogant and impudent that they do not allow you to get acquainted with the materials? Who is he? Your dear President Lyndon Johnson won the most from the assassination. " 33 (Looking ahead, Ramparts ceased to exist after about a year due to financial difficulties. The issue of the magazine, however, soon resumed, but it was only a shadow of the former "Ramparts"). Judging by Garrison's numerous interviews and articles, the investigation has entered a crucial phase. In late 1967, M. Lane settled in New Orleans to be on hand and help unravel the conspiracy woven by the dark forces. In the spring of 1968, M. Lane stated: "In the last few weeks, two emissaries have appeared in New Orleans. Both had tracked down Jim Garrison; both said they had brought a message from Robert F. Kennedy. Garrison knows they're both connected to Robert F. Kennedy. Both indicated that Robert Kennedy did not believe the Warren Commission's findings and agreed with Garrison that President Kennedy was the victim of a conspiracy." The emissaries assured Garrison that if elected president, R. Kennedy would launch a new investigation, find and punish those responsible. When asked by Garrison why Kennedy would not openly oppose the Warren Commission report, the mysterious emissaries said, "He knows there are guns between him and the White House." 34
Shortly after Kennedy's assassination, on July 12, 1968, Garrison announced that he had received new material from a foreign intelligence agency that had "penetrated the murder mystery." The mentioned service even "interviewed one of the murderers" 35 . The death of R. Kennedy in the wake of the murder of M. King doubled the interest in the district attorney. According to him, he held the keys to a dark plot. Publicist P. Flammond began writing a book about Garrison, which was published in early 1969, and met Garrison several times during the preparation of an extensive study. After the death of R. Kennedy, P. Flammond conducted another interview: "Jim, comment on the assassination of Robert Kennedy." "The order of the murders was as follows: John F. Kennedy, Dr. Martin Luther King, and Senator Kennedy... The available data in all three cases is sufficient to indicate that, in all probability, all of them were committed by the same force and all of them were not... they were the result of intelligence efforts." "American intelligence?" "Do you have any doubts that R. Kennedy would have ordered a new investigation if he had been in the White House?" The very fact that he was killed so hastily indicates that the CIA had no doubts about this either. I think that in
31 "Playboy", October, 1967, pp. 56, 58, 73, 75.
32 P. Flammonde. Op. cit., p. 269.
33 "Ramparts", January, 1968.
34 P. Flammonde. Op. cit., p. 277.
35 "The New York Times", 12.VII.1968.
page 141
in this case, they had no other choice. I am convinced that they did not want to commit another assassination, but they could not risk it if he became president. " 36
Garrison focused his efforts on supporting his theory with facts. It turned out to be a difficult task. April 16, 1967-former employee of the New Orleans Prosecutor's Office D. Andrews was sentenced to a year and a half in prison. No matter how hard Garrison struggled, he couldn't get any more information from him about Oswald's stay in New Orleans. But I got enough evidence about the presence of perjury, which formed the basis of the guilty verdict. Then he tried to get the persons involved, in his opinion, in the conspiracy - G. Novel, S. Smith and S. Mofett (respectively from the states of Ohio, Texas and Nebraska), but failed.
7. Processes, processes...
In the spring of 1969, Garrison completed his " hurdle investigation." He worked hard and received help from a wide variety of people. Among those who came to the aid of the district attorney, was the famous comedian Mort Sal. At one time, for joking about the Kennedy administration, he was blacklisted and actually lost his earnings. However? Sal didn't remember being offended. When Garrison went out to find the president's assassins, the satirist came to New Orleans and helped in any way he could. At the press conference, Sal announced: "I know who killed Kennedy. But all I can tell you is that there are some powerful internal forces involved, and when Garrison reveals what he knows, it will shake the country to its foundations. America will have to clean up its house." The satirist professionally aroused curiosity and from the stage added fuel to the fire, began to ridicule the report of the Warren commission. The trial in New Orleans was provided with the most magnificent "publicity".
At the turn of 1968 - 1969, changes occurred in the United States. The Democrats were defeated in the presidential election. The government took on a different political tone. L. Johnson, the No. 1 target of the comedian and prosecutor, turned into a private citizen. On January 20, 1969, the Republican administration took power in Washington. Those who were, according to Garrison, directly interested in concealing the truth about the president's assassination no longer held the levers of power. The country waited with intense attention for the District Attorney to lift the veil of secrecy, and for justice to do justice to the murderers who lurked under the mantle of an administration rejected by the electorate. And so, in early February 1969, a trial was held in New Orleans. The prosecutor's office first brought P. Rosso before the jury. He made a strange impression with his confused testimony. Meanwhile, during the preliminary investigation, Rosso spoke willingly, but under hypnosis and having received a fair dose of"truth serum". Then it was announced that the prosecutor's office was introducing a "mysterious witness". New York State tax collector G. Spiezel appeared in the audience. He told me that in June 1963, the In the French quarter of New Orleans, I heard Ferry and Shaw talking about the Kennedy assassination. Sensational statement! The defense asked if the witness could point out where the sinister house was located, under the roof of which criminal conversations were conducted.
Spiezel agreed. People poured out of the courthouse. The witness led the jury, judge, lawyers, defendant, journalists and onlookers-more than 350 people. Under Spiezel's guidance, they examined two houses. The witness said that one of the houses is "similar, if not exactly the same." The defense found out the identity of the witness. He presented himself as a great squabbler, and during two hours of cross-examination, he willingly told how he was being harassed: he sued the city authorities of New York, psychiatrists, a private detective agency, and several policemen for subjecting him to hypnotic "charms". As a result, Spizel suffered significant material and other damage: the villains forced him to "sell the case"37 . Defense witnesses passed before the court, and the prosecution's arguments were voiced... Garrison's claim was not supported by facts. The defendant categorically denied any wrongdoing.-
36 P. Flammolde. Op. cit., pp. 277 - 281.
37 "Time", February 14, 1969, p. 31.
page 142
blame points. In his closing remarks, Garrison insisted that the entire federal government apparatus had been mobilized to cover up the truth. The defense argued that Shaw's sole purpose in being on trial was "to create a forum for attacking the Warren Commission." The lawyers were very eloquent and active. Their fervor was fueled by the awareness of the client's rightness, who paid about $ 100 thousand for conducting the case .38
After a 6-week trial, the jury unanimously acquitted Shaw in less than an hour on charges of conspiring to assassinate the president. Garrison explained: "The jury's verdict simply indicates that the American people are unwilling to hear the truth." So Garrison failed. The Nation magazine summed it up: "The only mystery about Clay Shaw's not guilty verdict: Why did it take the jury 50 minutes to reach it? No evidence was presented in court, and the available evidence came from a bunch of preposterous witnesses, most of whom clearly needed psychiatric treatment... However, it would be a grave mistake to conclude, as many have done, that the verdict confirms the conclusions of the Warren Commission. First, these conclusions are not sacred. New facts may be unearthed that will undermine them. But, unfortunately, "facts "are not necessary to create a broad desire to believe, which has created a profitable market for various"conspiracy" theories. As for the murder itself, there is enough gossip, fabrications, coincidences, and conjectures to trigger new and startling theories. In fact, the number of theories is limited only by the imagination of their creators." The magazine asked sternly, " The only question is: will Garrison get away with it?" "he also said that the American Bar Association has asked the Louisiana Bar Association to investigate Garrison's motives." 39 This turn of events scared off a lot of other " investigators "who crowded around Garrison and wrote endless articles with references to the" secret information " that the district attorney had collected for the trial. Word spread rapidly that Garrison was nothing more or less than a CIA provocateur!
On April 20, 1969, the over-the-top New York Times Magazine published an article with the trenchant headline "The latest chapter in the Murder controversy." The author stated with obvious satisfaction: "Harrison's publicists, who talked so much about 'secret evidence' before the trial, have disappeared from view. After the Harrison case collapsed, the press, for obvious reasons, tried to forget about all this as soon as possible." The article was written by the same E. Epstein, who managed to compose another one after the book "Investigation" - "Anti-plot" directed against Garrison. He was undoubtedly relieved that his competitors, especially M. Lane, had temporarily abandoned the battlefield. Epstein authoritatively explained that all the opponents of the Warren report are writers, almost all of them are bad people, and some are just slackers and lied. He was stigmatizing Harrison and Co . "In view of the disgrace that Garrison has brought upon all of them, it is not surprising that some now disgruntled critics [of the Warren report] have even put forward the theory that Garrison is a CIA provocateur. Of course, many of the critics were guilty, at least of credulity, and by and large of deliberate lies." The brisk scientist who changed the front ended his article with these words:: "The lesson Harrison taught us is very clear: you can't separate the integrity of evidence from the integrity of the person presenting it. Since there is unlikely to be a new investigation in the near future, and since many critics have been discredited for their role as investigators in the New Orleans episode, it seems likely that the Garrison case could prove to be the final chapter in the murder controversy. " 40
In November 1969, the population of New Orleans determined their attitude to J. R. R. Tolkien. To Garrison, and therefore to his investigation. He was re-elected prosecutor for a third 4-year term. One of his rivals in the election, G. Konnik, in the pro-
38 "Time", March 14, 1969, p. 27.
39 "Nation", March 17, 1969, p. 324.
40 "The New York Times Magazine", April 20, 1969, pp. 30, 117, 120.
page 143
shlom, an employee of the federal prosecutor's office, explained the results as follows: "Voters probably believe that he should be re-elected, because he challenged the federal government"41 . On March 1, 1970, Shaw filed a $ 5 million lawsuit against Garrison and related individuals. Shaw's lawsuit says that the prosecutor started the trial against him in order to " conduct an illegal, useless and defamatory investigation into the assassination of President Kennedy... and gather materials to attack the Warren Commission." Finally, on April 20, 1969, the trial of the murderer of R. Kennedy Sirhan ended in Los Angeles. The trial on the Pacific Coast, which lasted more than three months, began earlier than the hearing in New Orleans, and ended later. Although the outcome was the opposite, the evidence accepted by juries in the south and west of the country boiled down to one thing: there were never any plots against statesmen who died from the bullets of murderers.
Sirhan appeared in court on January 7. Three lawyers defending him offered the court a deal: Sirhan pleads guilty in exchange for sparing his life. In Tennessee, the murderer of Martin Luther King received a 99-year prison sentence in this way. Judge T. Walker rejected the defense's request, and the defendant stated that he was not guilty of premeditated murder. The prosecutor's office insisted that it was Sirhan who deliberately killed Robert Kennedy: on June 2, 1968, he was seen at a meeting where the senator was present, and on June 4, he trained at a shooting range. The defense was based on attempts to prove that Sirhan was insane at the time of the crime. The prosecution ridiculed the defense's claims, presenting the court with witnesses who spoke about the cold-blooded behavior of the criminal during the attempt.
Then Sirhan's notebook, full of such notes, was presented to the court: "I stand for the overthrow of the current US president... The so-called president of the United States will eventually be overthrown by an assassin's bullet." Endless threats to Robert Kennedy: "The RFK must die, it must be finished. Robert Kennedy must die, die, die... " (and so many times). Under the date May 18, 1968, there is an entry: "My determination to end RFK is becoming unshakeable."
Reading the court records, as well as the school inspector's testimony that Sirhan was an incompetent student, made him lose his temper. He went on a rampage in the dock, demanding that the lawyers be counted. Sirhan said to Walker, " Now, sir, I want to retract my original statement that I am innocent." "Am I to understand that you want to plead guilty to all charges?" "Yes, sir." "What kind of punishment do you want to suffer?" "Please execute me, I killed Robert Kennedy intentionally, I thought about it for 20 years." The judge smiled and said, "Well, that still needs to be proved here in court." 42 True, the prosecutor's office did not intend to support such far-reaching claims with evidence, but it showed extraordinary zeal in another area: everything was done to leave no shadow of doubt that Sirhan acted alone. It took some effort. A few minutes after the Kennedy assassination, witnesses saw and heard a young woman dressed in a colorful dress rush out of the Ambassador Hotel, shouting, " We shot him! We shot him!" On June 7, 1968, nightclub dancer Katie Fulmer reported to the police, claiming it was her. The police, after questioning the dancer, released her, commenting contemptuously: she simply sought fame. On April 10, 1969, Katie committed suicide.
The prosecutor's office found and called the woman who was wearing a colorful dress. In court, she testified that she worked for R. Kennedy in the election campaign and, of course, was shocked by the murder. Deputy District Attorney L. Compton told the press: "The FBI and the Los Angeles Police Department interviewed literally thousands of people, following all the assumptions and possibilities. No connection has been found between Sirhan and anyone else." Finally, Sirhan's testimony. He explained: "I'm tired of being a foreigner and lonely." Sirhan said that he became interested in the occult: for long hours he hypnotized himself, looking in the mirror between two burning candles. Sirhan tried telekinesis (moving objects by suggestion), but gave up because he was afraid of going mad. The defendant said that at first he loved Ro-
41 "International Herald Tribune", 10.X.1969.
42 "Time", March 17, 1969, p. 17.
page 144
Burt Kennedy, however, then changed attitudes toward him. In May, he indulged in his usual routine of staring at the mirror. Then he heard the radio announcing that Kennedy was in favor of transferring 50 Phantom planes to Israel. "I realized," the defendant explained, " that Kennedy is not as good a guy as they say he is. I looked in the mirror and saw him, not my face."
On the day of the murder, Sirhan got drunk and wanted to go home. He got into his car, but was afraid to drive drunk. Sirhan then took a gun from the car, went to the hotel, drank coffee there, and then found himself being strangled by the police after the assassination of Robert Kennedy. This is what Sirhan's account of events looked like. Six psychiatrists invited by the defense found out that all this is natural. Sirhan is a schizophrenic and suffers from obsessions. In addition, he hypnotized himself, acted in a trance. The jury was not impressed by the scientific explanations. They also ignored the psychiatrists ' strange stories about how they managed to hypnotize Sirhan in prison and reproduce the scene of the assassination attempt. Lawyer Parsons chose a different course. Addressing the jury, he exclaimed: "Do we execute such people in California? What, are we going to follow Hitler, who killed the poor, orphans and the sick?" But the courtroom recalled that Sirhan, while still at school, in 1962-1963, emphasized in his textbooks the places where it was said about political assassinations. In the margins of a book about the assassination of President McKinley in 1901, he wrote:: "Many will follow him." The prosecutor summed up: everything proves that "this is a cold-blooded and calculated decision to take the life of Robert F. The decision was made well in advance of the defendant's arrival at the Ambassador Hotel.
On April 17, after almost 18 hours, the jury returned a verdict: Sirhan is guilty of first-degree murder. Under California law, a jury decision was also required to determine the penalty. On April 23, during a 12-hour session, the jury, after four votes, decided: the death penalty in the gas chamber. The lawyers demanded a new review of the case, as the court rejected the defense's request for an agreement that in exchange for being found guilty of premeditated murder, Sirhan's life would be spared. Then a letter arrived addressed to Judge G. Walker, written in an elegant hand. Edward Kennedy, having received the consent of the whole family, asked not to execute the killer. He wrote: "My brother was a loving person, full of high feelings and compassion. He wouldn't want his death to be the cause of another person's death. Remember what he said when he heard about the death of Martin Luther King. Then he said :" We in the United States do not need disagreements, we in the United States do not need hatred, we in the United States do not need violence and lawlessness, but wisdom and compassion in relations between us... If my brother is considered a real person, then what he said should be thrown into the balance in favor of compassion, mercy, and the divine gift of life. " E. Kennedy came to his decision for many reasons. As Time magazine noted, " Kennedy's close associates began to talk about the possible consequences of the death sentence. Civil rights activists may launch a campaign to save Sirhan from the gas chamber. Friends were waiting for demonstrations in front of Ted's Senate office and Ethel's Hickory Hill home. " 43
But Judge G. Walker rejected all requests for commutation of the death penalty to prison on May 21, 1969. Sirhan was sent to the death row at Saint-Quentin Prison. The defense filed an appeal. "Now the real struggle begins," the man who was sentenced to death said optimistically.
8. Some totals
It happened in early 1967. At a social gathering in Washington, Averell Harriman spotted an English journalist who represented a respectable London newspaper in the United States. A grizzled, ruthless political gladiator approached the Englishman and said: "Sir Winston Churchill said that only a few people understand the politics of their own country, but no one can understand the politics of another country. I think this is the least of your vices. You are zhur-
43 "Time", May 30, 1969, p. 19.
page 145
a nationalist who is incapable of truthful recognition of facts and does not have the slightest sympathy either for the people or for the institutions that are dear to our country. From now on, I won't see you at home or at work." "Thank you very much, sir," said the unruffled Englishman. What exactly did this journalist, Henry, do? Fairlie, from The London Sunday Telegraph? All he did was go to Harvard, go through the John F. Kennedy Graduate School, and check out the Institute of Politics. The journalist described a certain phenomenon in articles that appeared on January 15, 1967 in the English " The Sunday Telegraph "and the American"Washington Post and Times Herald".
The first of these newspapers did not fail to gloat in an editorial: Henry Fairlie's disturbing account of the Kennedy family using the vast wealth under its control to gain political influence and ultimately retake the White House is more reminiscent of the mores of eighteenth-century England than of twentieth-century America. In the past, our leading aristocratic families monopolized talent, formed personal factions and cliques, hoping to seize power, until the development of democracy put an end to this practice. It is amazing how the aristocratic evil that was uprooted in England more than a hundred years ago is growing in democratic America with the fervent support of the entire color of American liberalism. What the Cecils and Cavendishes have long been forbidden to do here, the Kennedys are beginning to do with impunity in America."
The London newspaper generally confirmed Churchill's judgment, although the political reality of America was presented in the editorial in an inaccurate form. Its author overlooked an essential fact: the relationship between money and power is much more complex. The Kennedys are fabulously rich. This is absolutely true. Truman and Eisenhower were people with more modest incomes. But no one can reproach them for not following the will of the class that put them in power. As for the Kennedy brothers, for the privilege of engaging in politics at their own discretion, they gave not only their lives, but also significant financial resources drawn from the family funds. In principle, we are talking about something else - about power, its borders and how to use it. Here, money plays a slightly different role. The watershed in the United States for John F. Kennedy was not due to the wealth of the family (in the eyes of the bourgeois average American, this is more of a virtue than a disadvantage), but was created by the methods of his exercise of presidential power. The question in assessing the Kennedy brothers rests on the concept of presidential power itself. Is it necessary for those who consider themselves "American society" and take the courage to speak on behalf of the entire people? Election of J. R. R. Tolkien President Kennedy seemed to give a positive response. But let's turn to Professor Arthur Schlesinger.
In the 1950s, he proclaimed that the United States was living in an " era of carelessness, passivity, and fatalism." At the end of the decade, he diagnosed the reason he had formulated: Americans had forgotten that strong, talented individuals move history forward. If so, then the role of the individual in history must be thoroughly studied, which Schlesinger did, summarizing his observations in the research articles " The Decline of Greatness "("Saturday Evening Post", November 1, 1958) and "On Heroic Leadership" ("Encounter", December 1960). Then John F. Kennedy was growing into a national figure; the country needed Caesar; it needed him like bread and air. Schlesinger discovered: "There is a curious contradiction between the theory and practice of democracy, for in practice democracy as a form of government has assumed (indeed, regularly demanded and put forward) heroic leadership." To prove his point, he called up the shadows of the "founding fathers of the republic", who, the professor assured, always stood for strong leadership. In general, he tried to shatter the concept that middle-class, bourgeois-minded, law-abiding Americans complacently believe that they live in a democracy.
The professor's idea developed very intricately. They made an attempt to synthesize completely heterogeneous elements. Schlesinger piously insisted that the following statement of W. Wilson is true:"A few enlightened individuals can be good leaders only if they have conveyed their credo to many, if they have managed to turn their thinking into mass and popular." Two pages later-
page 146
Schlesinger stated: "There is an urgent need to reconstruct the democratic theory in order to enable us to solve the problem of leadership... The classical theory of democracy serves as a breeding ground for all of us. However, in its strict purity, it was a source of endless trouble. By denying positive leadership its proper role, this theory has tied the hands of democratic societies... Classical ideology misled the people not only about their leaders, but also about them. A citizen in a democratic society simply cannot play the role provided for by classical philosophy. In theory, he has the power and initiative that he does not have in practice. " 44
Schlesinger probably thought his thoughts were terribly innovative. In fact, he reworked the decrepit hero-mob theory, although he showed quite realistically that in the vaunted "democracy" of the United States, the rights of a citizen are an empty phrase. Schlesinger's reasoning is somewhat reminiscent of the paradoxes of Dostoevsky's The Grand Inquisitor. In the collective image of a gloomy old man, brought to life by the pen of a Russian writer, you can, if you want, consider a small-grained overseas professor. The " Grand Inquisitor "long before Schlesinger solved the problem of the leader and the people in the same spirit, contemptuously referring to the latter as"the herd." In his mouth and in a much more perfect artistic form, F. M. Dostoevsky put the teaching that people are happy only when they entrust their fate to others.
And now Schlesinger looks around: there are "no more" great people in the world who decided the fate of humanity only recently, in the 40s. "There are no colossi anywhere, no giants anywhere." Small people went: "Our age has no heroes; whether this is good or bad for us and for civilization, still deserves careful consideration." After studying the problem from different angles, Schlesinger came to the conclusion: it turns out bad in general, and especially bad for America. The country, Schlesinger insisted, needed Prometheus in politics.
The professor ended his remarks in a heroic spirit: "An age without great people drags at the tail of history. The great attraction of fatalism is, in fact, a refuge from the horror of responsibility. Fatalism thus blesses our weaknesses and excuses our mistakes... We should not be complacent about our apparent ability to do without great people. If our society has lost the desire to have heroes and the ability to promote them, we may have lost everything. " 45 Schlesinger used everything to prove his thesis, mobilizing the theoretical resources of American political science to the end. His articles are an example of verbal balancing. He actively recruited supporters, including Professor S. Hook, who had published The Hero in History study back in 1943, and attributed to his colleague the opinion that "great people can have a decisive influence"on the course of events. Meanwhile, in the aforementioned book, S. Hook, as applied to the US political system, argued the opposite: the place of the great is only "in the pantheon of thought, ideas, social activity, scientific achievements and the visual arts." 46
But the Kennedy years suggested that America needed a " strongman."
In all likelihood, the realization of this fact prompted Theodore Sorensen, one of the most influential ideological executors of the late president and senator, in late 1969 to give a detailed explanation of Kennedy's ideas as applied to our day. Sorensen's reason for speaking out was clear: in the 1970 election, he was running for the Senate as a member of the New York State Democratic Party organization, which meant he was trying to put on shoes that Robert F. Kennedy didn't wear. "John and Robert Kennedy," says the senate candidate, " proved by their very lives that the individual can grapple with forces that are considered ingrained, established mores and customs, and change them. But they have gone into oblivion. Today, young people and the oppressed are naturally skeptical about whether the Kennedy legacy will last." Well, zheg, otve-
44 A. SchIesinger. The Politics of Hope. Boston. 1962, pp. 6, 21.
45 Ibid., pp. 23, 24, 33.
46 S. Hook. The Hero in History. Boston. 1960, p. 237.
page 147
Sorensen points out this in his book "The Kennedy Legacy", it is alive and even capable of new development. Only "now it's up to others to move it forward." What should I move anyway? Sorensen explains that we need to "reconstruct our society" along the paths outlined by the Kennedy brothers. "Both of them strongly objected when they were qualified as liberals. The essence of Kennedy's legacy is to lead the country and its political thought beyond traditional liberalism... They believed in innovation, reform, experimentation, and a peaceful revolution against the status quo." All this can be accomplished only by implementing the doctrine of strong presidential power, introducing "both written and unwritten prerogatives of the presidency." This is exactly what J. R. R. Tolkien did. Kennedy in 1961-1963, and " in 1968, Robert Kennedy differed from many liberals (antagonized by the Johnson presidency) in that he continued to emphasize the need for leadership in this post."
In conclusion, Sorensen wrote: "More people in our country than ever before are angry and desperate, while an unheard-of number of people enjoy all the benefits of life. Some blame the creator, but John F. Kennedy reminded us, " Here on Earth, God's work is essentially in our hands." This is partly a mystery caused by the author's personal desire to witness the triumph of "Kennedism". This is understandable: T. Sorensen admitted that "for me, the legacy of both Kennedys is the sum of the most important ideas of our time." 47 If we talk about the "Kennedy legacy", then the question boils down to which will be stronger: the concept of so-called "Wilsonism" (a strong president) or the theories developed by Fulbright, who advocated "the interaction of many minds, none of which is great." In other words, the triumph or fall of "Kennedism" in the United States depends not only on the United States itself, but also on the development of the entire world. The answer will be given in general not so much by American history as by world history.
47 T. Sorensen. Op. cit., pp. 276, 265, 269, 395.
page 148
New publications: |
Popular with readers: |
News from other countries: |
![]() |
Editorial Contacts |
About · News · For Advertisers |
![]() 2014-2025, LIBMONSTER.COM is a part of Libmonster, international library network (open map) Keeping the heritage of the United States of America |