Skip navigation

John Chuckman



Last JFK murder mystery?

Good God, the author should do some serious reading before writing on the subject.

Far from it, I could supply a list of mysteries.

There are CIA and FBI files never released, presumably some of the most damning.

For example, those involving his easy acceptance back from the Soviet Union after being there for more than two years at the height of the Cold War, and with a Soviet bride.

How did Oswald begin learning Russian in the Marines?

We know Oswald did some paid informant work for the FBI, we even have his informant number, but many details remain unknown.

We still do not know whether it was Oswald or someone else who went to Mexico City because CIA supplied the wrong picture taken by its surveillance camera and said voice recordings were routinely destroyed.

Why was the limo hurried off to Ford in Rouge River to be rebuilt almost right away? Several who saw it in front of the hospital briefly said there was a bullet hole in the front windshield and a mark in the chrome trim.

Why is the chain of evidence in Dallas, as handled by the Dallas Police, broken for a number of key pieces of evidence, including bullet shells?

Why are there huge conflicts over the autopsy photos, as there are? It seems certain two sets were made at two different times and they do not show the same things according to a number of witnesses.

Why, to this day, can’t experts agree on aspects of the autopsy? There are a number of absolutely crucial details left unknown, including whether the body was sectioned to follow bullet paths.

What is the reference to “surgery of the head” noted at the start by two FBI agents who watched the autopsy? There appears for this and other serious reasons to have been two procedures at two hospitals, the one we call the autopsy being the second.

JFK’s head literally exploded, and doctors at the emergency treatment said much of the back of the head was missing with brain material hanging out. That cannot have been a shot from the back.

Further it cannot have been the kind of “jacketed” bullets supposedly used by Oswald. Only a dum-dum or hollow or soft-core bullet acts that way. Never explained.

The shot in the neck was certainly also from the front since the emergency doctors agreed it was a wound of entrance.

The Texas Governor’s wounds could absolutely not be explained by the “single-bullet theory” and the Governor himself always believed he was hit by a separate shot. The Warren Commission ignored him. The bullet residue left in him were never retrieved, even when he died.

There is still no evidence that Oswald even bought the junky rifle attributed to him. The paperwork trail leads nowhere.

As does the matter of his postal box. Someone else had access, and mail was received there many days later.

Well, there’s a start, and there’s plenty more without paying any attention to far-out theories.


Response to a reader asking why Kennedy assassination still important with all the world’s other horrors today:

I agree, but just think how important it is that America’s government never solved this. Actually, I think it did, but it never told us what it found for still secret reasons. If it can do that and get away with it, it’s no surprise about the secret horrors it inflicts in places like Syria and keeps lying about.





John Chuckman



There are at least two reasons for this provocation by Turkey.

ISIS has been financing itself by stealing Syrian oil and selling it to Turkey at a discount.

Putin’s recent heavy bombardment of the trucks and facilities involved undoubtedly irritates Erdogan, and I believe his own son is involved in this whole operation.

The second reason for this is that it was meant to put a stop to a genuine anti-ISIS coalition.

When I say “genuine,” I mean one which actually targets the terrorists – as Russia is doing – and not one which targets Syria and effectively protects ISIS, which is the pattern of America’s efforts, the ones supported by a disingenuous David Cameron.

Turkey is the last country wanting a genuine coalition since it is a major supporter of ISIS. It uses those murderous thugs against both the Kurds Erdogan so hates and of course against the government of Syria, a reasonable government which opposes some of Erdogan’s fetid dreams of empire.

Of course, in any matter involving Erdogan, there is always the sheer fact of his mental instability as an explanatory variable. This man who built himself a grotesque, one thousand-room palace recently, makes contradictory statements on important matters every few days, and hates some groups like the Kurds with an intense white heat is a genuinely erratic and unstable man.

It’s all a dirty business, and the only honest major player is Putin. Cameron, Obama, Erdogan, and Netanyahu are outright liars and supporters of terror. They are also guilty of supporting criminal invasion of a peaceful country. Hollande was with them but has been wavering.

The various words by American Defense Secretary Ash Carter over recent time sound just like something from Dr. Strangelove, full of dark threats and anger over America’s dirty plans being thwarted by Putin.

If what these people were doing in Syria was honorable and acceptable to public opinion, why do they keep lying and hiding what they are doing?

There is no doubt Turkey’s act was premeditated. If the plane was in Turkish airspace, it would have been only for seconds over the point of land which sticks down into Syria.

You do not shoot someone for that, especially when it is well known what they are doing.

The plane crashed 4 kilometers inside Syria.

And we have the surviving pilot saying there was no warning at all.

In the end, I very much believe Erdogan will regret this rash act. Already, Russia is building a no-fly zone in the area.

The missile cruiser Moskva is to be stationed in the area with instructions to attack threats.

Putin is also putting the S-400 anti-aircraft system, the world’s most formidable, at the Russian base.

Still further, fighters will accompany all bombers now.

John Chuckman



Why should Assad retire?

He represents the people of Syria better than anyone else.

The army supports him. The country’s main clan groups support him.

By all accounts a majority of Syrians support him.

Remember, David Cameron represents exactly 35% of British voters, hardly a democratic mandate.

Even were Cameron a more representative leader of Britain, what business is it of his to pass on the acceptability of Assad?


That is clearly up to the Syrian people to decide.

Cameron of course is the recipient of regular calls from Tel Aviv on these matters, and Israel is one of the group that created the horror in Syria for its own interests.

Israel wants Assad out and Syria reduced to the kind of rump state that Iraq is after the American invasion.

What is really at stake here is never discussed in public, and certainly not by the inept and rather dishonest David Cameron.

What is at stake is the right of states to exist in peace without outside interference from aggressive states like America and Israel.

The roles of Turkey and Saudi Arabia in this horror are only possible because America approves. Nothing of this nature could happen otherwise.




John Chuckman



Britain’s bombing in Syria – no matter what the targets – would be just plain old-fashioned aggression.

The government of Syria has not sought Britain’s help – and contrary to arrogant people like David Cameron, it does indeed have a government, as legitimate as most in the world.

The only people doing any bombing with the permission of the government are the Russians.

This is not a small point for all those concerned about the rule of law, which you might think would be a prime concern for all those who claim to oppose terror.

It took centuries to establish some rule of law in international affairs, and today states like America and Israel and Turkey ignore it completely.

And good old David Cameron wants to join the mob, getting his bit of attention.

And it can’t have escaped Cameron’s attention how handsomely the war criminal, Tony Blair, has been rewarded for doing his dirty part in tearing apart Iraq. He has been showered with gold and sinecures.

Wouldn’t it be natural for Cameron to expect a bit of that for dropping bombs on Syria?

John Chuckman


Why does The Guardian quote a man like Ash Carter saying absolutely nothing?

This is puke tossed from high places, so much so that it is almost comic but for the deadly serious underlying facts.

All thinking people who keep informed on world affairs know it is America putting the world increasingly at risk.

Good God, America has killed millions in the last half century in many pointless wars and interventions.

And the entire, insane war on terror is largely its responsibility, a result of its arrogant and terribly unjust policies in the Middle East for decades.

Russia is a civilized and relatively peaceful country by comparison.

And all of today’s disasters – Libya, Syria, Yemen, Iraq, Palestine – are either America’s direct doing or benefit from America’s cooperation and support.

And virtually every tyrant we see – Egypt, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Turkey – has America’s blessings.

This is propaganda so completely twisted from truth, it resembles a bad dream.


Response to a reader referring to MH-17:

Yes, one of America’s “keyhole” satellites was overhead at the time of MH-17 being shot down.

These satellites have cameras comparable to the Hubble Space Telescope plus many other technologies of observation.

The Russians knew this of course, and they said so very early.

But not one scrap of data was ever submitted to investigators by America.

Clearly, there was a cover-up of MH-17’s downing to protect America’s infant coup-government in Ukraine.

And the pathetic Dutch, under America’s thumb, worked a year to produce a report containing nothing but the bits we already knew.

And in this case in Egypt, after days we have idiots asserting what happened with no evidence.


If it was a bomb – and it is very premature to say it was – a strong suspect would be Israel’s secret service.

ISIS has no capacity for doing this on its own. Since ISIS and al-Nusra are very much doing Israel’s (and America’s) work in Syria, Israel’s displeasure with Putin is important.

Israel, as we know from many past events including in Iran, has often used timed explosive devices.



Response to a comment from another reader:

Your words reveal you as one of the pathetic boys who diligently search internet sites for discussions in which Israel is mentioned, and then post crap like this, being paid so much a line for the work.

I know perfectly well “ISIS” claimed credit. So what?

Indeed, ISIS is in part an Israeli creation.

Ever note how ISIS never attacks Israel in any way, which is exactly what such a wild-eyed bunch would do, were they authentic. They are frauds, mercenaries supplied and paid by America, Israel, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar to destroy Syria.

Now, Israel has used time bombs countless times, so involvement in the Russian airline downing would be nothing new. It used MEK members in Iran to murder a number of scientists with timed car bombs.

These ugly practices of Israel’s go all the way back to the Lavon Affair in 1954, when it was caught red-handed planting bombs in in Egypt. Even before, in 1946, there was the King David Hotel atrocity killing about a hundred people, the work of a Jewish terror group headed by Menachem Begin, a future prime minister. And need I remind readers yet again of Israel’s deliberate attack on an American surveillance ship, the USS Liberty, to cover up illegal activities in the Sinai during the 1967 War?

Yet another well-known example of deception involved President Reagan’s bombing of Gadhafi. That was the direct result of fake transmissions originating in Israel which succeeded in fooling the U.S. into attacking Gadhafi over his presumed guilt for an attack in Europe against American soldiers, something never proved, by the way, although innocents like Gadhafi’s young son died for it.

Israel also tried this dirty trick around the time of the sarin poison gas use in Syria. There were fake transmissions trying to make the Syrian Army look responsible for the attack in the hope America would bomb Assad, but in this case the truth became known in a timely fashion. It was the very terrorist forces Israel is known to support who used poison gas in Syria, gas perhaps supplied by Israel.

No one who criticizes such dirty work is guilty of hating anyone or anything except a government which behaves very much like that of the old Soviet Union.

People like you have pretty close to succeeded in making the term “anti-Semite” meaningless by using it dozens of times a day against people you don’t even know. For all you know, this writer could be Jewish.

How appallingly ignorant you are, and that is a pure fact and not name-calling.

People such as you are succeeding also in speeding the day when Israel collapses, again much like the Soviet Union, by trying to maintain a state built on endless injustice thickly coated with lies.

John Chuckman


It is completely inappropriate for a senior military man to be making comments about a politician.

Gen. Sir Nicholas Houghton’s words are shameful.

Politics and the military only successfully mix where there are coups and juntas.

What is most shameful here though is the implicit permission the general has from David Cameron to butt into politics.

With each passing day, Cameron proves a greater and greater incompetent and a danger to genuine democracy.

John Chuckman


Charlie Hebdo always was, and remains, something of a free-speech fraud.

It viciously attacks Muslims and Catholics and others, but it has not been an equal opportunity publication.

Things Jewish and Israeli are not attacked. And if they were in today’s France, the staff would face prosecution.

Readers may enjoy this, written after the Charlie Hebdo Affair in Paris:

John Chuckman


Kerry says the United States is sending fifty (special forces) troops to fight ISIS?

Fifty stinking troops? That surely is a joke.

But fifty troops to assist and advise ISIS and sister terror organizations such as al-Nusra, that makes some sense.

And since special forces use sabotage and covert operations, it is likely they would be involved in attacking Syrian infrastructure to help make the lives of Syrians still more miserable. After all, America’s jets, supposedly fighting ISIS, have in fact bombed targets such as Syrian power plants. The troops can serve as target spotters. That too makes some sense if you have the kind of twisted goals America has.

Or the fifty troops could form a human shield around some of America’s hardworking terrorist-mercenaries against Russian bombing, that too makes sense.

Of course, there is the overlooked fact that Russia works in cooperation with, and at the invitation of, the government of Syria. The United States does not, conveniently having declared with the wave of the imperial hand that longstanding government, known to be supported by a majority of its people, to be illegitimate.

How convenient, but its troops remain, no matter how small the number, simply invaders, and the United States violates international law putting them there. But international law has never hindered the United States or its Middle East colony (aka, Israel) when either of them wanted to do something.

What is it exactly that these invaders would advise and assist in?

Bringing down the legitimate government of Syria. It can’t be anything else because that is the mission of the very people they are assisting and shielding.

Now, if that isn’t being involved in “the civil war”, what is?

Kerry just keeps going in circles, but that is precisely the path of American foreign policy.

Just using that term, “civil war,” is ridiculous because it is not a civil war.

It is an invasion by terrorists, secretly assisted by Kerry’s government and some of its allies to remove a leader they do not like and reduce yet another peaceful country to what America produced in Libya and Iraq.

John Chuckman


Thank you for this moving account of your treatment by Egypt’s el-Sisi government, but such horrors cause David Cameron, now welcoming el-Sisi to Britain, no loss of sleep.

The truth is that Israel could not tolerate the previous, elected government of Egypt a week longer, and that is why it was toppled. Cameron invariably extends his friendship towards anyone doing Israel’s bidding. Rupert Murdoch, his patron, undoubtedly insists.

We all know how Israel loves jabbering about democracy in public relations speeches, but, when it comes to any neighboring countries or people, the jabbering falls strangely silent. Democracy for any of Israel’s neighbors is viewed as toxic.

And just so, Hamas in Gaza, not a terrorist organization but a party representing Palestinian interests (one Israel even secretly assisted in its early days in order to sabotage Fatah), a party which was freely and fairly elected in Gaza and relentlessly attacked by Israel ever since.

With whom does Israel insist on dealing in all matters concerning Palestine, at least on the very few occasions it deigns to talk? Abbas, a man who is not elected.

Some democratic values. Some democracy.

I’m sorry, but Egypt will never have a democracy of any meaningful description so long as Israel remains what it is.

John Chuckman


A very wise man has spoken here, likely the finest diplomat for a major country of our time.

American policy in the Middle East and Europe and Asia has become impossibly convoluted and dangerous.

The Russians are in fact doing the job no one else honestly wanted to do, ruining the chances for terrorist bands to takeover Syria.

And Americans didn’t want to do it precisely because the terrorist bands are doing their dirty work for them.

Any insertion of American troops, even a small number of special forces, adds only to extreme ambiguity and danger. Clearly some could be struck by Russian jets, and then what?

God, we all need to expect America to start behaving rationally in its foreign policy. The stakes are immense since Russia is competent to literally obliterate America and vice versa.

It is not a situation in which to play games and frat-boy pranks, but that is exactly what America is doing.


Response to a comment about the EU speaking out against America’s decision:

Yes they should, but, in case anyone hasn’t noticed, the EU has been supine towards American policy recently. There simply are no strong leaders at this time.

If only on the firm basis of international law, Cameron, Hollande, and Merkel should speak out against the move, but it is virtually certain they will not.

John Chuckman


As a Canadian with a strong bias towards international relations, I have little good to say about any of Stephen Harper’s cabinet.

But I do think it important to point out something about how that awful government worked.

Harper had the precise temperament of a tyrant.

He allowed no minister of senior government bureaucrat to speak out on any matter whatsoever.

If they were interviewed by the press, an event fairly rare during the Harper years, they had “canned talking points” from which they dared not depart.

You never learned anything of substance from such interviews. Harper himself rarely, rarely subjected himself to interviews.

Harper kept this kind of discipline over senior officials because he had in private a terrible temper, and he was a highly vindictive mam.

All that is to say, you really cannot say in most cases what his ministers believed or didn’t believe.

I have heard Chris Alexander giving the official line, but I have also heard people who know him that he is a fairly decent man who doesn’t agree completely with the bleak views of Stephen Harper. I don’t know.

This was said by people who knew him during the shameful treatment by Harper of Syrian refugees. Harper accepted virtually none – in complete contradiction to Canada’s historic humanitarian role.

Later, it was revealed that the small number even being accepted were being held up by having applications slowly and inappropriately securitized for religious identity. The secret order went out – we know from a brave civil servant who leaked the fact – to not admit any Muslims. Imagine, no Muslims from Syria – that’s the kind of filthy man Harper was.

Harper’s motives can only be speculated about, but I think they involved his bizarre relationship with Israel. He was absolutely servile towards Israel, a posture which earned his party handsome campaign-finance contributions from Israel’s lobby.

That same motivation is likely behind Harper’s ugliness towards Russia. Fans of Israel do not like any country which opposes American interests or challenges American hegemony, America being the country’s chief source of financial subsidy and unquestioning support.

At any rate, Russians should never believe that Harper’s views were the views of most Canadians. He held office with 39% of the vote.

John Chuckman


Martin Amos virtually never has been right.

Unless of course you mean in the sense of “on the Right,” the far Right.

Amos is both a boring writer and a boring talker, but in the Cameron-Murdoch set that does not matter.

None of them reads or listens.

John Chuckman


Here’s more propaganda from The Independent, so poorly disguised you cannot vouch for the source.

God, don’t you ever get tired of pushing this stuff out?

Even if you could account for the source, this is propaganda precisely because it has absolutely no perspective. The best propaganda always has a tiny bit of truth, and the truth here is that, yes, such weapons are used.

You absolutely cannot fairly take one small part of a huge destructive war and suggest that it explains what is going on. It cannot. It can horrify people though, and that would appear to be its purpose here because The Independent makes no practice of presenting such things in most situations.

I can’t recall any equivalent material being used by The Independent for Israel’s slaughters in Gaza, and such material does exist. Some very brave photographers took images of the rivers of blood and smashed children.

I don’t recall such material for America’s (and of course Britain’s) proud invasion of Iraq in which such ghastly weapons as cluster bombs and white phosphorus were used. Thousands of pictures exist of sliced-up children and smashed women, but you never ran any.

The creepy Saudis, whom Britain implicitly supports and with whom it explicitly does a handsome business, are, right now, killing masses of civilians in Yemen, and they are using America’s dreadful cluster bombs to tear them apart, maiming those not killed. Where are your terrifying images?

The horror in Syria did not start by the government’s barrel-bombing places. The barrel-bombing is a response to the infiltration and entrenchment of tens of thousands of heavily-armed terrorists trying to destroy the country from scattered and hidden positions all over it.

They were infiltrated into Syria by the lunatic now running Turkey. They are financed and supplied by the absolute princes of Saudi Arabia. They were assisted, advised, and even led in some cases by the same government of Israel which holds more than five million unwilling people as prisoners. Yet more money came from the absolute princes of Qatar.

And the United States has also supplied and trained elements. It clearly approves of what has been going on or it would be stopped. We know to a certainty that nothing happens anywhere near its Middle East colony of which it does not approve.

Britain under David Cameron, as one of America’s most groveling allies, has also done its dirty bit to help.

This entire misery could be ended if outside help and support for thugs were ended, but that help and support, by the above-named parties, will not stop. Because those countries want Syria destroyed just the way Iraq was destroyed, reduced to a meaningless set of rump states with a population left to suffer for a generation.

And they want to achieve that in the most cowardly of fashions, giving the bloody work over to hired mercenaries and ideological maniacs while standing off – tsk-tsking at the horrors as Cameron is wont to do – pretending they have nothing to do with it.

I simply do not understand how anyone can think human trash like ISIS and al-Nusra Front should prevail over a reasonable, highly-educated man like Assad, a leader who has always protected a secular and diverse society and who keeps the support of large parts of that society.

It is a totally absurd situation, and it can only be explained in light of American policy. It is the policy that destroyed Iraq and Libya and sparked in large covert operations the whole pointless and wrongly-named Arab Spring. There was nothing spring-like in what happened.

A brief experiment with democratic government in Egypt was smothered following Israel’s complaints about the threat it represented. Egypt was returned to a decades-old dictatorship much to Israel’s liking. In other places, like Bahrain and Saudi Arabia, potential uprisings were violently suppressed by absolute governments.

It was all an effort to re-mold the region to the liking of America and its Middle East colony under a façade of popular revolt and never mind all the inconvenience of death, destruction, and misery. The region’s authoritarian governments were overthrown only where they disagreed with America and/or Israel while in all other cases they were left to flourish, and the authoritarian governments overthrown were only replaced by others. Democracy flourishes nowhere.

Well, Mr. Putin understands that, and if the nations doing the deadly supplying aren’t going to stop, he’ll destroy what they’ve supplied. The Syrian army will do the rest.


Julian Assange has said that the massive influx of refugees into Europe is, in fact, part of the American strategy to de-stabilize Syria, and I don’t doubt that he is right. Emptying Syria of good parts of its professionals and technicians only further weakens it.

This, of course, puts in quite a different light Ms. Merkel’s controversial, open-arms support for unlimited refugees in Germany. She, rather than speaking from a heart larger than we would have credited her from past behaviors, is just once again supporting American policy, a much more familiar stance for her.

John Chuckman


Tell it to the Americans, Daniel, and their nasty associates in the Middle East.

By the way, landmines are now only a small portion of the problem.

America’s cluster bombs are even worse, leaving tens of thousands of bomblets, each of which will explode into razors when touched.

Saudi Arabia, courtesy of America, is using them in Yemen right now.

The United States used countless of them in Iraq, and you can still find pictures of the results on Iraqi children.

Israel literally covered the earth with more than a million of them on the Lebanese border a few years back.

John Chuckman


Forget humans for the foreseeable future.

Send more robots.

They, the robots, have done a fabulous job, and at a fraction of the cost of transporting and sustaining humans.

We want to learn.

Astronauts are just inefficient, costly showboats.

John Chuckman


Reader comment:

“It has done nothing but kill people for 65 years, having invaded every neighbor that it has, many of them two or three times.”

Israel was attacked in 48, 67 and 73 by armies (variously) from Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq. Israel risked being annihilated in all these wars.

Read some history – don’t parrot what you’ve read on far-left hate sites.”

Your comment is arrogant and uninformed. It simply repeats the David and Goliath myths manufactured by the Israeli Ministry of Truth for American consumption.

It is you who should read some history.

The 1967 War was engineered by Israel. Yes, some Arabs attacked, but only after an elaborate series of aggressive and provocative acts by Israel. It was what Israel wanted because its government had made an elaborate calculation ahead and was sure it would win fairly quickly. The prize was all of Palestine and part of Syria.

In the War, Israel also betrayed its best allies.

De Gaulle, a defender of young Israel, warned that he wouldn’t support conquest, but he was ignored.

The United States told Israel not to turn their armor north after defeating Egypt, but that’s just what Israel did because the entire intent of that war was to conquer what Israel still occupies to this day. Just ask yourself why else it still holds millions of people captive and has worked so hard to make their lives miserable as an incentive for their leaving?

In order to turn the armor in the Sinai quickly, Israel had to eliminate its Egyptian prisoners, and that is what it did. It shot hundreds of POWs, much as WWII Germans sometimes did.

To cover this up from the United States and to cover up turning armor north, it attacked the American surveillance ship, USS Liberty, trying desperately for two hours to sink it with everything the pilots had. This was not an error as Israel claimed later, the ship was not only well-marked, Israel had been told of its presence, and the Israeli attack pilots who first buzzed the ship waved to the waving crew.

As to 1948, well, please, it was Israel who was slaughtering Palestinians, driving them out of their own land to seize their farms, homes, and villages – all re-named afterward. There were several documented mass atrocities by people like the Stern Gang, Irgun, and other Jewish terror organizations. Hundreds of civilians were shot and Palestinian women were raped. The hope was that all Palestinians would simply run away as the rumors spread. I should hope some Arab states responded with anger, but they made only a half-hearted effort.

1973 was indeed an attack by Egypt against Israel, but it happened in light of all I’ve written above and far more.

Israel has demonstrated not an ounce of ethics in its 65 years. Duplicity and killing have been the chief features of Israeli policy over the entire period. Let’s not forget several invasions of Lebanon, killing tens of thousands, creating a years-long occupation (against which Hezbollah was formed, an army of genuine freedom-fighters, not terrorists), and using such horrible weapons as large numbers of cluster bombs on civilians.

And then America invaded Iraq, largely on Israel’s behalf, killing a million. Now Israel and America have terrorists doing the same thing in Syria.

It has been a completely destructive and destabilizing history.

John Chuckman


It’s not merely a “wrong method.”

It’s completely stupid because it violates Europe’s own interests.

Anyone who looks at a map may plainly see that Europe and Russia form “a marriage made in heaven,” as they say.

Europe’s vast industries and huge population right next to Russia’s vast natural resources and willingness to do business.

The United States has been pushing such nonsense on Europe for many years, and it is based entirely on a selfish imperial American ideology, not the interests of others.

The great irony is that America is always shouting from the roof tops about free markets, but then when that fair-minded economic philosophy comes seemingly into conflict with the American Empire, the Empire wins, every time.

I remember being in Washington back in the 1980s for an energy conference, and I met a representative of the State Department who expounded on why Europe should not buy Russian natural gas.

I told him then that that was an entirely wrong-headed view, but it is clearly one still cherished in Washington decades later.

It is actually pathetic that any state in Europe does not completely ignore Washington’s dim-witted attitude.

John Chuckman


Of course she should.

But then that goes equally for her former boss, a.k.a., the President.

For thinking people, there never has been a great mystery about Benghazi.

It is an instance of classic blowback in a dirty intelligence operation.

The U.S. was rounding up, from the bloody mess they made of Libya, weapons and human scum to be shipped through Turkey to go kill still more people in Syria.

The Ambassador, up to his armpits in the dirty business, provided some thugs an accessible target as attractive in their eyes as any they might find in Syria.

The United States cannot explain the events in Libya because to do so would admit its responsibility for the bloody horrors of Syria.

John Chuckman


This is the dumbest, most Daltonesque stunt yet by McGuinty’s successor.

Unions are private organizations whose job is to get concessions from employers.

The teachers’ unions are already well endowed because their members are well endowed, thanks to taxpayers.

Paying the unions money because you change the way negotiations are conducted is an idea straight from cloudcuckooland, and it should make clear to everyone in what a sad state of affairs we find ourselves. Quite possibly, the original change in the structure of negotiations was itself a hare-brained idea.

But then I must remember the Premier and her Education Minister are both former teachers.

God, will no one ever make a serious effort to get control over public education?

It is simply out of control.

Teachers who’ve left the classroom run the entire thing from principals to directors and to the Education Ministry.

Not only is the average public school teacher not skilled at management, many of them aren’t even very good teachers because they have no special knowledge or strong motivation.

Unions belong in steel mills and plumbing shops, if anywhere, and not in schools. The very fact that they are there and function the way they do supports the previous observation about teachers’ skills.

The proof is in the pudding: Ontario’s schools are not overly successful, and they are not even close to world-class. They are so-so, but they cost a fortune to run, almost all of it in the form of salaries and benefits.

Our teachers often can’t use a computer, and computers have not been integrated into how we educate children. There are computer programs which should have replaced paper exercise sheets and even text books long ago, but Ontario doesn’t exploit their learning strengths and cost reductions. Self-correcting programs designed by really capable people expert in their fields will beat the average drone teacher hands down in communicating a subject. They also can provide greater challenges to brighter students while allowing slower ones to go at a suitable pace.

We only get fraudulent reforms from our government such as making teachers’ college a two-year program. Twice as much of nothing is still nothing, and it costs everyone twice as much. All this “reform” did was grandfather a lot of college staff who would have lost their jobs under mandated reduced student enrolments, itself a simple management housekeeping task which should have been done years ago. Teachers’ colleges are where to go if you want to witness junk-science being taught as professional-level material. Moreover, they are staffed, again, with teachers who have left the classroom. Ridiculous.

We are backward in our public education, but the people responsible for the fact are never accountable and only ever want more pay and privileges, and our silly government is always ready to give it to them, sometimes even in elaborately disguised ways.

There are no checks or controls over the quality of our public education. No one assesses our teachers for their knowledge, curiosity about what is new, classroom demeanor, or methods at any point in what may be some forty years of exposing young minds to them. The only assessment ever is the fiasco that goes on in the teachers’ colleges. Their superiors, the principles, are only ex-teachers who’ve taken additional piles of academically-undemanding courses at a teachers’ college. They know nothing of management except by accident.

There are no able managerial people handling public education’s vast resources. None. If you have been exposed to a number of board superintendents and directors, you know how just how ineffectual a bureaucrat can be. They pretty much beat anything in all the old jokes about government agencies.

Local curricula for the most part are just nonsense because there is only a world curriculum if you want to be competitive.

Our public education today is a one-way trip to nowhere.

John Chuckman


Mark Steel is just a second-rate propagandist.

Of course, China has its flaws, and some serious ones.

But perspective is everything.

After all, let’s not forget that Britain did help mightily in killing about a million people in Iraq, the creation of a couple of million miserable refugees, and the destruction of large parts of an advanced society for generations.

And Britain happily supports America’s horror in Syria, the letting-loose of tens of thousands of well-equipped cutthroats in an effort to destroy a beautiful land.

I haven’t heard any public cries from Downing Street over the Saudi terror campaign in Yemen, including the use of cluster bombs on civilians. Perhaps I missed something?

No, I don’t think I did. There was nothing either about all the Saudi beheadings and a sentence of crucifixion either. But there was a huge secret arms sale and a project for building prisons in one of the world’s great tyrannies.

Please, stuff like this of Mr. Steel’s is just clap-trap. I doubt very much he raised his voice on such other atrocities as Israel’s murderous abuse of several million Palestinians for half a century. This remains the world’s single greatest example of a complete squashing of human rights and decency: the Palestinians have no votes, no rights, no future, and they can’t even enjoy their homes and farms with any security. Again, that is a matter about which we never hear from good old David or Mr. Steel for that matter.

After all, for David to do so, even slightly, would seriously harm relations with Rupert Murdoch, a man, by the way, whose British publishing empire was built in part on hacking the intimate telephone conversations of hundreds of unfortunate people, including victims of violent crime. To say nothing of casting a pall over those delightful country weekends with Rupert’s designated creature in Britain, red-haired bombshell Rebekah Brooks

Interesting, despite China’s shortcomings in human rights, it has pretty well lived in peace with its neighbors for its entire modern existence.

That certainly cannot be said of the United States or its colony in the Middle East, the two most dangerous states in the modern world, both of whom get David’s unlimited support and affection.


America has given us nothing but wars and coups and “interventions” since the end of the Second World War. The toll of their attempts to control the planet, including such glorious episodes as the Vietnam War, has been literally as many people killed – mostly civilian, as is the case in all modern war – as were killed in the Holocaust.

Three million victims just in Vietnam, another million in Iraq, a million in Cambodia, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Chile, Guatemala, and on and on.

Israel, America’s colony in the Middle East, has behaved as a miniature replica of the mother country. It has done nothing but kill and suppress people for 65 years, having invaded every neighbor that it has, many of them two or three times.

I don’t see how anyone can write what Mark Steel writes without being entirely ignorant of modern history or deliberately ignoring it. In either case, the result is not worth publishing.

John Chuckman


Yes, there is something to the notion of Justin Trudeau’s experience in Canada having some application to Jeremy Corbyn’s situation in Britain.

Corbyn doesn’t have Trudeau’s good looks or family heritage, but they do share one very important quality.

They are both politicians who speak remarkably honestly.

And the people do come to understand that when they’ve heard from someone enough times.

Insincerity is the hallmark of most run-of-the-mill and smarmy politicians such as David Cameron.

And the people come to understand that, too, just as Canadians understood it about Stephen Harper.

It’s just that they often, or usually, do not have an authentic choice in elections.

Give them a meaningful choice, and the democratic results can be gratifying.

Jeremy Corbyn has before him this possibility, and the hack political establishment knows and fears it.

That’s why they came crawling out of the woodwork, day after day, name after name, at the mere possibility of his nomination as leader.

Imagine the second greatest liar living on the planet, Tony Blair, advising people against an honest man?

And the press gave him generous coverage, too, while he was doing it.

Pretty close to ridiculous.

Now, when we enter the subject of ISIS and other terrorists in Syria, we enter the world of complete dishonesty.

American flunkies like Cameron and Harper can do nothing about ISIS, except making token gestures. They are neither powerful enough nor can they take acts against what is American policy.

ISIS, al Nusra, and other gangs of murderers are doing America’s bidding – Israel, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar serving as America’s chief administrative assistants in the murderous work.

David Cameron’s implicit support for the terrorists in Syria, while blubbering on about fighting them, may be characterized as David’s doing Rupert Murdoch’s bidding.

Rupert is an intense supporter of Israel’s interests, and the effort to destroy a stable Syria largely reflects Israel’s interests, just as the destruction of Iraq did. The cries of the birth of a new Middle East, as Condoleezza Rice once so graciously described subsidized murder and mayhem on a colossal scale.

Only this time, the key players and their associates do not want to take the credit and consequences and lingering sense of blameworthiness and shame involved in another illegal invasion, so they are secretly supporting a big gang of cutthroats – recruiting, training, supplying, and arming them – all while play-acting regret in public about the horrors they inflict. Who knows, such cynical, black-hearted policy may even have included plans to attack their own bloody servants in terror once the job of ruining Syria was done?

It is only because of the apparent contradictions arising from all the stoked-up press propaganda about ISIS – meant to play up their horrible acts as theater for the folks back home, intensifying Islamophobia and support for the existing, highly selective war on terror – that David Cameron feels moved to blubber on about (token) bombing.

But, of course, he has no intention of opposing American policy or Rupert Murdoch’s dictums in such matters. And that would considerably reduce the charm of country-house weekends with Rebekah Brooks.

Cameron wants to have his cake and eat it too, as they say. Talk about the banality of evil – David Cameron surely is one of our chief living examples, much the same as Canada’s now-departed Stephen Harper.

But Russia’s genuine intervention in Syria is changing all of that by revealing the true state of affairs, how a determined attack can decimate these bloody thugs in fairly short order, unlike America’s long-running pretend-attacks and actual attacks on Syrian infrastructure meant to support ISIS against Syria.


Response to a reader saying Trudeau’s victory was all in his name:


No, you are wrong. He fought a tough campaign, going from a point of being third in polls to victory.



Response to another reader calling Corbyn “a dead man walking”:


Yours are words which carry the pungent, seamy odor of Tony Blair with them.

John Chuckman


A bit too much religion here, as there is in so much of this kind of apocalyptic discussion.

Every bad or undesirable thing going on seems thrown into the pot to suggest humans are creating a sixth great extinction.

We do change the planet, but I’m not sure that such change isn’t “in the scheme of things.”

The planet itself has changed immensely, time and time again, as the primordial super-continent broke up and pieces drifted apart, as great meteors fell from space, as volcanism reached high levels, and as the incoming solar radiation levels changed.

I would love to preserve every interesting or beautiful species, but I am afraid that is not possible, any more than it is possible to return mammoths and sabre-toothed cats.

Life itself is about change, continuing, relentless, and unstoppable change. It is called evolution. We as a people wouldn’t even be recognizable to our ancestors of only a few hundred thousand years ago.

And I think it likely we will not be recognized by our future generations, as humans become part electronic or part genetically modified or even replaced by robots.

John Chuckman


That is an understatement.

Positively depressing is closer to the mark.

Worst of all, the very meaning of being Canadian in the world has been diminished and debased.

Harper stole something very precious from us, our good name.

John Chuckman


This article tells us very little worth knowing while ignoring some tremendously important facts.

Apart from leaving out two unexplained cut-out mattes we have of someone standing in the backyard, the kind of thing used in forging composite photos in those days, even were the photo of Oswald authentic as claimed, it proves precisely nothing.

We know Oswald was carrying on a deception campaign about being a communist. In fact, he was a paid FBI informant (we even have his identifying number) during this effort which included everything from writing letters to handing out pamphlets.

He had previously been a phony defector to Russia for over two years in a program created by the Office of Naval Intelligence, a brainchild of the CIA’s legendary and often bizarre James Angleton. As a young Marine, one of above-average intelligence, Oswald was selected for Russian language training and suddenly started receiving communist literature at his barracks, to the amusement of his fellows. This was unquestionably to help build a “legend” for his future phony defection in a rather questionable program intended to discover what day-to-day life was like in the Soviet Union.

There is also absolutely no evidence Oswald actually purchased a mail-order rifle from Klein’s Sporting Goods in Chicago. It is too detailed to go into, but it remains completely unsettled whether he or someone else made this purchase. There is significant evidence that another unknown person had access to Oswald’s postal box.

The “killer” shot – the one to the right temple which explosively exited the rear of Kennedy’s skull, the occipitoparietal area, with a spray of material, including half his brain. Police outriders were hit with some of this gruesome stuff. Mrs Kennedy’s famous reaching back on the limousine was about reaching a piece of his skull blown back on the trunk. Such damage cannot ever be caused by a jacketed bullet of the kind used in the Mannlicher. It was caused by a soft nosed or explosive bullet. And it cannot ever be caused by a shot from the rear. Simply impossible.

In any event, that rifle is completely unsuitable for an assassination. It was not sighted correctly and was notoriously inaccurate as well as being subject to jamming. The World War II Italian army had utter contempt for it calling it a widow-maker.

Still further, there were several witnesses that the first rifle found at the Book Depository was a good one, a larger-calibre Mausser. It disappeared and the cheap Mannlicher–Carcano appeared later. Also the shells supposedly fired by Oswald were unrealistically lined-up on the floor for bolt-action shooting. The Dallas Police handled all evidence unbelievably badly – the chain of possession of key items having been violated many times – and there is strong reason to suspect some members were in on the conspiracy, including the one said to have been shot by Oswald later on a suburban street, Officer Tippet, a known right-wing militia type with highly questionable associations.

It is very likely that one of the assassination team – there were at least three men firing – fired ammunition suitable for the Mannlicher-Carcano with a device called a sabot, which allows a rile to fire smaller ammunition without making new barrel markings, from a different rifle. This provided actual strikes of such ammunition in the limo.

The limo had damage never formally investigated, including a hole in the windshield. After Kennedy’s body was taken to the hospital, the car was rushed off, ending up soon after to Ford’s Rouge River plant where it was cleaned-up and partially re-built, a totally inappropriate treatment of evidence. For the brief time it was at the hospital, despite Secret Service efforts to keep people away, several, including a reporter, saw the windshield bullet hole. There was also damage to chrome trim.

No honest and rational person who studies the evidence available to us can deny Kennedy was attacked from the right front (the general area of the grassy knoll). The first non-fatal neck wound was also an entry wound from the front. Other shots were fired from behind, but none of them would have seriously hurt him. I say “honest” person because there has been a stream of writers and apologists who have worked to muddy the waters, likely all in the pay or with the encouragement of the CIA, which has been covering up from day one with key files still not released.

By the way if you want to see an intriguing bit of photo analysis, see:


Response to a reader saying we already knew backyard picture authentic from Marina Oswald:

Yes, she authenticated the photos, under pressure from FBI and Secret Service men who controlled her every movement and could determine her fate, and that of her children, as to staying in the U.S. Marina’s testimony is simply riddled with contradictions and uncertainties, making her sound almost insane at times.

John Chuckman


I think we all instinctively knew this, but it is always nice to have hard supporting evidence.

Blair is so clearly an extreme narcissist, perhaps even a full-blown psychopath.

His personal ambitions could only be fulfilled in partnership with the United States, Britain not truly having any longer sufficient weight to throw around in the world.

George Bush offered Tony Blair, given Blair’s personality, the opportunity of a lifetime: be a genuine war prime minister, get to portray yourself as an opponent of tyrants, experience the gratitude afterwards of America and its satraps (millions flowing in still), hear your name rung out with praise, and feel very consequential.

The dark eccentricity of Tony Blair seems as though it should have been obvious to the public from the start.

He and his wife are genuinely bizarre figures. But we all have political systems full of glitches which do not serve genuine democracy, Mr. Cameron for example now serving with 35% of the vote.

To see good examples of the weird Blairs:


Response to another comment about being time to look into Doctor Kelly’s mysterious death in those days:

Doctor Kelly, indeed.

But I doubt that was Blair’s work, although he certainly helped cover it up.

Kelly made the mistake of being honest with BBC and others. Recall how BBC got its wings clipped, essentially for telling some truth, a commodity with which Tony Blair was never comfortable. These events suggested to other parties that Kelly might spill some seriously embarrassing additional knowledge.

Israel certainly is a possible candidate for his murder, because Kelly, the arms expert, knew where the nuclear bodies were buried, including what happened to the fissile material from South Africa’s small nuclear arsenal after apartheid’s collapse, which some speculate covertly went to Israel.


Response to a reader comment:


“…murderous regimes like Saddam’s”?

You condemn yourself out of your own mouth for lack of knowledge and meaningful perspective.

Saddam was a nasty piece of work, but the world has many such men including the often overlooked, blood-drenched Netanyahu, and Saddam’s acts were nothing compared to Tony and George’s handiwork.

The invasion of Iraq murdered about a million people, destroyed the most advanced society in the Arab world, created two or three million refugees, has close to split the country into rump states, and left millions for years without jobs, electricity, and even clean water.

It also left countless long-lived dangers behind like tons of depleted uranium dust and cluster-bomb bomblets. The invasion of Iraq was horror on a colossal scale.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.