Here in one volume, are 14 of AMERICAN FREE PRESS correspondent Michael Collins Piper's most explosive articles and essays - many you've never seen in print - along with other fascinating information, including the texts of five different question-and-answer radio and television interviews with Piper, and detailed reviews by popular writer Victor Thorn of Piper's three major works.
Softcover, 256 pages
Table of Contents
A Prophet Without Honor—Mark Glenn
1 The Monica-Gate/Israeli Connection
2 FDR Knew in Advance About Pearl Harbor
3 Israeli Attack on USS Liberty
4 The Holocaust is Over—Enough is Enough
5 Zionism Moves Against the United Nations
6 Israel and Islamic Fundamentalism
7 The Federal Reserve Isn’t “Federal”
8 The Oklahoma City Bombing
9 Populist Author Speaks in Malaysia
10 Israel Linked to JFK Assassination
11 Controversy Surrounds Final Judgment Author
12 Peter Jennings and The Kennedy Assassination
13 Did Chicago Mafia Really Have a Hand in Killing JFK?
14 Mossad Linked to Martin Luther King Assassination
15 Final Judgment Interview—June 9, 2003
16 High Priests of War Interview—May 24, 2004
17 American Free Press Week—October 29, 2004
18 The New Jerusalem Interview—June 17, 2005
19 Oklahoma City Bombing—June 6, 1997
20 Final Judgment—January 10, 2003
21 The High Priests of War—May 17, 2004
22 The New Jerusalem—August 31, 2005
Excerpt from CHAPTER TEN
Israel’s Nuclear Ambitions
Linked to JFK Assassination
Did John F. Kennedy’s determined (and then secret) behind- the-scenes
efforts to prevent Israel from building a nuclear weapons arsenal play a
pivotal part in the events that led to his assassination on November
22, 1963? Was Israel’s intelligence service, the Mossad, a front-line
player in the JFK assassination conspiracy alongside elements of the CIA
and international organized crime?
Why did Hollywood film-maker Oliver Stone fail to reveal—in his 1993
all-star JFK assassination extravaganza—that the hero of his epic,
former New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison, had privately
concluded that the Mossad was ultimately the driving force behind JFK’s
As the 40th
anniversary of the JFK assassination approaches— with worldwide
attention focused on the problems of nuclear proliferation in the Middle
East—is it valid or appropriate to raise the question of possible
Israeli complicity in the assassination of an American president?
These are just a few of the hotly controversial questions being posed by Michael Collins Piper in his book, Final Judgment,
which has emerged as a proverbial “underground best-seller” in the
United States, the topic of heated debate on the Internet, and the
subject of angry exchanges in a variety of public forums.
What follows is Piper’s own comprehensive survey of his findings as published in Final Judgment.
In 1992, former U.S. Congressman Paul Findley, a liberal Republican,
made the little-noticed but intriguing comment that “in all the words
written about the assassination of John F. Kennedy, Israel’s
intelligence agency, the Mossad, has never been mentioned, despite the
obvious fact Mossad complicity is as plausible as any of the other
Where in the
world could Findley—never known to be an extremist by any means, and
certainly not one given to venting conspiracy theories—have ever come up
with such an assertion?
Actually, it’s not so extraordinary a thesis if one looks at the
historical record, placing all of the conventional theories about the
JFK assassination in a new perspective, calculating in previously
little-known details that shed stark light on the circumstances
surrounding JFK’s demise and the geopolitical crises in which the
American president was embroiled at the time of his shocking murder.
In truth, even the most recently widely-disseminated exposition of JFK
assassination theorizing—Oliver Stone’s 1993 blockbuster film, JFK—did
not present the entire picture.
Although Stone portrayed former New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison as a hero for pointing the finger in the direction
of elements of the U.S. military and intelligence net- works as the
guiding force behind JFK’s murder, what Stone didn’t tell his audience
was something even more controversial: that privately, after some years
of research and reflection, Garrison had reached an even more startling
determination: that the driving force behind JFK’s murder was no less
than Israel’s feared intelligence service, the Mossad.
As astounding as it sounds, there’s actually good reason to conclude
that Garrison may have been looking in the right direction. And in this
day when the debate over “weapons of mass destruction” is in the
forefront of global discussion, it is not so extraordinary a thesis as
anniversary of the assassination of John F. Kennedy approaches; and the
fascination with the murder of America’s 35th president won’t go away.
Assassination “buffs”—not just in the United States, but around the
globe—continue to chip away at the conclusions of the two official U.S.
government investigations into the affair.
Although the 1976 report by a special committee of the U.S. Congress
formally contradicted the earlier 1964 finding by the
presidentially-appointed Warren Commission that alleged assassin Lee
Harvey Oswald was acting alone, and concluded instead that there was
indeed the likelihood of a conspiracy behind the president’s
murder—hinting broadly at the involvement of organized crime—the
congressional committee’s final determination actually raised more
questions, in some respects, than it answered.
In 1993, Hollywood’s Oliver Stone entered the fray with his blockbuster all-star extravaganza, JFK,
which presented Stone’s interpretation of the widely-publicized
1967-1969 JFK assassination inquiry by then-New Orleans District
Attorney Jim Garrison.
Stone’s film—featuring Kevin Costner as Garrison—raised the specter of
involvement by elements of the so-called “military-industrial complex,”
along with a scattering of anti-Castro Cuban exiles, right-wing
militants, and rogue Central Intelligence Agency operatives. The film
told the story of Garrison’s investigation, and ultimately unsuccessful
prosecution, of New Orleans business-man Clay Shaw (then suspected of
being—and later proven to be—a collaborator with the CIA) for
involvement in the JFK conspiracy.
However, as we now know, not even Stone was faithful to his hero.
Long-time independent JFK assassination investigator A. J. Weberman has
since revealed that during the 1970s—well after Garrison’s prosecution
of Shaw—that Garrison was circulating the manuscript for a novel (never
published) in which Garrison named Israel’s Mossad as the mastermind of
the JFK assassination conspiracy.
Garrison never said anything about this unusual thesis—at least
publicly. But beginning in the mid-1980s, and well into the present day,
new evidence has emerged that not only points to good reason for Mossad
motivation to move against John F. Kennedy, but also to the likelihood
that not only Clay Shaw (Garrison’s target) but other key figures often
associated in published writings with the JFK assassination were indeed
closely tied to the Mossad and doing its bidding.
And what is particularly interesting is that none of the individuals in
question—Shaw included—happened to be Jewish. So the allegation of
Mossad involvement being somehow “anti-Semitic” in nature falls flat on
that fact alone. But Mossad complicity—as the record indicates—is a very
Garrison’s critics continue to assert that the New Orleans District Attorney couldn’t make up his mind as to whom he thought
had orchestrated the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. This
indeed was the primary complaint against the rambunctious, outspoken,
and quite colorful prosecutor: that he simply couldn’t make up his mind.
And this is one of the reasons that even many of Garrison’s supporters
not only began to question his sincerity, but even as to whether
Garrison’s investigation was worth the trouble.
In truth, Garrison did tend to shoot from the hip. That may have been
his biggest mistake—one of many—in the course of his controversial
inquiry into the murder of America’s 35th president.
At one time or another during the course of that investigation,
Garrison pointed his finger at one or another of the various possible
conspirators—ranging from “right-wing extremists” to “Texas oil barons”
to “anti-Castro Cuban exiles” to “rogue CIA operatives.” Occasionally,
Garrison went so far as to say that the conspiracy included a
combination of those possible conspirators.
When Garrison finally brought one man to trial, widely respected New
Orleans trade executive Clay Shaw, Garrison had narrowed his field,
suggesting, primarily, that Shaw had been one of the lower-level players
in the conspiracy.
According to Garrison, Shaw was essentially doing the bidding
of highly-placed figures in what has roughly been described as “the
military-industrial complex” —- that combination of financial interests
and armaments manufacturers whose power and influence in official
Washington—and around the world—is a very real force in global affairs.
Garrison suggested that Shaw and his co-conspirators had multiple
motivations stimulating their decision to move against President
Kennedy. Among other things, he asserted:
• The conspirators opposed JFK’s decision to begin withdrawing U.S. forces from Indochina;
• They were angry at his failure to provide military cover support for
Cuban exiles attempting to topple Fidel Castro in the botched Bay of
were bitter at JFK for firing long-time CIA Director Allen Dulles, a
grand old man of the Cold War against the Soviet Union; and
• In addition, Garrison hinted, JFK’s successor, Lyndon Johnson, may
have wanted JFK removed from office for the purpose of claiming the
crown for himself, but also because JFK and his younger brother,
Attorney General Robert Kennedy, were not only plotting to remove
Johnson from the Democratic national ticket in 1964, as well as
conducting federal criminal investigations of many of Johnson’s closest
associates and financial backers—even including those in the realm of
In the end, after a relatively brief deliberation, the jury hearing the Shaw case acquitted Shaw. It was only later—much later—that evidence emerged that Shaw had indeed been a CIA informant, despite Shaw’s protestations to the contrary.
Only in recent years has it been determined, for example, that the
American CIA was deliberately sabotaging Garrison’s investigation from
within, not to mention providing assistance to Shaw’s defense. And
although there are those who continue to say that Shaw’s acquittal
“proved” that Shaw had nothing whatsoever to do with the JFK conspiracy, the bigger picture suggests quite the contrary.
Shaw was involved with something very murky, and so were others in
Shaw’s circle of friends and associates. And they were, in turn,
directly connected to the strange activities of Lee Harvey Oswald in New
Orleans the summer just prior to the assassination of John F. Kennedy,
before Oswald’s sojourn to Dallas. Dozens of writers—many with differing
points of view—have documented all of this, time and again.
So although the “official” legend is that Jim Garrison believed that
the CIA and the military-industrial complex were the prime movers behind
JFK’s murder, when all was said and done, Jim Garrison had privately
reached quite a different conclusion, one that remains largely unknown
even to many people who worked with Garrison throughout the course of
In fact, as noted, Garrison had decided—based on the entirety of everything that he had learned from a wide variety of sources—that the most likely masterminds of the JFK assassination were operatives of Israel’s intelligence service, the Mossad.
The remarkable truth is that—although Garrison apparently didn’t know
it at the time, precisely because the facts had yet to be
revealed—Garrison may have been on to something far more than he
record now demonstrates that in 1963 JFK was embroiled in a bitter
secret conflict with Israeli leader David Ben-Gurion over Israel’s drive
to build the atomic bomb; that Ben- Gurion resigned in disgust, saying
that because of JFK’s policies, Israel’s “existence [was] in danger.”
Then upon JFK’s assassination, U.S. policy toward Israel began an
immediate 180-degree turnaround.
Israeli historian Avner Cohen’s new book, Israel and the Bomb,
confirms the conflict between JFK and Israel so powerfully that
Israel’s Ha’aretz declared Cohen’s revelations would “necessitate the
rewriting of Israel’s entire history.” From Israel’s perspective, writes
Cohen, “Kennedy’s demands [on Israel] seemed diplomatically
inappropriate … inconsistent with national sovereignty.” In any case,
Cohen pointed out, “The transition from Kennedy to [Lyndon] Johnson …
benefited the Israeli nuclear program.” CHAPTER 10 97
Ethan Bronner, in the New York Times,
called Israel’s drive to build a nuclear bomb “a fiercely hidden
subject.” This explains why JFK researchers—and Jim Garrison—never
considered an Israeli angle.
While all of this presents a strong motive for Israel to strike against
JFK, even maverick Israeli journalist Barry Chamish acknowledges that
there exists “a pretty cogent case” for Mossad
collaboration with the CIA in the assassination conspiracy.
The fact is that when Jim Garrison prosecuted Clay Shaw with conspiracy
in the assassination, Garrison had stumbled upon the Mossad link.
Although (after his acquittal) Shaw was revealed to have been a CIA
asset, in 1963 Shaw also served on the board of a Rome-based company,
Permindex, which was (the evidence suggests) actually a front for a
Mossad-sponsored arms procurement operation.
A Prophet Without Honor
By Mark Glenn
“If you want to know what’s going on in this country, this is where
you’re going to find it,” the man behind a table at a gun show told me. I
could see that his table was full of all kinds of material similar to
what was on the paper that he had just handed me, as well as many other
books and newspapers. I looked over the publications that he was
selling, and remember seeing a book entitled Behind Communism, and I
made a mental note to come back to that one. The Controversy of Zion was
another, which looked to be a little too heavy to digest at that
moment. There were newspapers as well—one entitled Criminal Politics—and
another that really caught my eye because of its professional-looking
appearance. It was very simply named The Spotlight.
I started scouring The Spotlight
and realized that a lot of the information dealing with banking, the
United Nations, and Israel was very foreign to me; but not so foreign as
to be alien. I came across an article about the JFK assassination,
which would have been interesting enough all by itself, but it was the
name of the writer that caught my eye due to the fact that he proudly
included his middle name. This is in a country where people rarely do
so. There was no hyphen anywhere separating these names, and for
whatever reason this middle name was something that he considered an
integral and indivisible part of who he was, and that was how he wanted
to be known. What this told me was that his middle name, which he so
proudly carried with him, was probably that of someone important in his
family, and that he was proud to associate himself with this individual.
His name was Michael Collins Piper.
the fact that he used his middle name, there was something about his
first name as well that beckoned me towards his article. Michael was the
name of the Archangel whose picture I had always seen as a young boy in
church. I had always loved that image of an angel who was wielding a
sword, ready to strike downwards with it into his mortal enemy, the
devil, who was prostrate beneath the feet of this heavenly
warrior—powerless to do anything about it. I had always loved that name
and had planned that my first son, if I were blessed enough to have one,
would bear that name as well.
the man behind the table knew that I was a big fish or not didn’t
matter. I was interested, and he had hooked me. I shoved the wad of
money back into my pocket and stood there reading the article about JFK,
unaware of those who were milling about around me. If the man at the
gun table behind me did or said anything that indicated his disappointment, I didn't hear it.
article on JFK resembled a beautiful young woman I had seen in Italian
class a few years ago; and like her, I couldn’t take my eyes away. I
devoured every word in this article as fast as I could, not thinking of
the intellectual indigestion that might result later. I was floored by
what Michael Collins Piper was saying: that a foreign
government—supposedly an ally of America—was responsible for the murder
of our president. He laid it all out very succinctly and professionally,
and there was nothing in his presentation that smacked of academic
sloppiness. He wasn’t covering UFO’s or Bigfoot or the Loch Ness
Monster. His thesis (and the presentation of it) was unlike anything I
had ever encountered in my college history courses, regardless of the
fact that it was obviously not a mainstream theory. I turned to the man
behind the table who had lured me over.
mean it was Israel who killed John F. Kennedy?” I asked in shock. He
must have been watching me the whole time as I read the article, because
his eyes and mine met as soon as I looked up at him. The man’s face was
grave as he nodded his head slowly up and down a few times without
blinking his eyes. “There’s a lot more than that, son,” he added.
I scarfed up as many of The Spotlight
newspapers as I could without cleaning him out. I also looked over the
books he had for sale, but decided that the newspapers would be enough
for now. Although I didn’t realize it at the time, this was one of those
life-changing moments upon which individuals look back and can chart
all the secondary effects that follow in its wake. In The Spotlight I began reading the words of a writer named Michael Collins Piper.
Mr. Piper realizing it, I would eventually become—over the ensuing
years—his understudy, and he would become my mentor. From a distance of
many miles, he tutored me as a Jedi master teaches a Padwan learner.
While other ‘cutting-edge’ writers were talking about UFOs and the
Reptilians, he was methodically and meticulously fleshing out the image
of a beast that had taken control of the most powerful nation in the
world. Like a special prosecutor, he charted the names, events, dates
and peculiarities of the most dangerous criminal conspiracy that has
existed in history, and was getting very little recognition for doing
so. The rest of the resistance movement was more interested in black
helicopters and UN troops who were stationed in the national forests
rather than under- standing the mechanics of the Zionist agenda. After
years of listening to what my grandfather had said, something finally
snapped into place and I began understanding it all. This was in no
small part due to what I had learned from Michael Collins Piper in a
weekly populist newspaper called The Spotlight, later to be replaced by American Free Press.
knowing it, Piper had taught me how to read the tea leaves of what was
taking place in the political world, and in particular the involvement
that this entity known as Zionism played in it. As a result of his
analysis, it was as if I had been given special glasses, not unlike the
ones needed to watch a 3-D movie; without which the picture remains
fuzzy and two-dimensional. By now it had been a long time since I
graduated from the likes of Rush Limbaugh and G. Gordon Liddy, for the
information these men (who had somehow become extremely popular in
recent years) were attempting to peddle to the American people was
child’s play, comparatively speaking. They were lightweights, and that
was putting it as politely as possible, since it became obvious that
what they were really doing was protecting the beast by deflecting
attention onto other matters.
the day came for me to put all these years of study to the test. Like
any graduate student seeking an advanced degree, a dissertation must be
presented to the review board. One does not receive their advanced
degree by simply attending classes for many years. He or she must take
what has been learned and put it to practical use. I was about to be cut
loose from my mentor and sent out to wage war, using the techniques he
had taught me, but with my own particular style and flair.
dissertation began on a date that changed America for- ever—September
11, 2001—and whether such a change will be for the better or for the
worse remains to be seen. To be honest, I was not as surprised at what
happened on that day as was the bulk of America. Like many others who
had lived with the knowledge that an evil agenda was clawing its way to
the top in this country, I had come to recognize the hand of this agenda
in many things … Ruby Ridge, Waco, the World Trade Center bombing in
1993, and the mother of them all up until that point, Oklahoma City.
fact that I wasn’t surprised didn’t keep me from watching the news
coverage which was taking place all day. I had learned from reading Mr.
Piper’s works that the agenda can be very sloppy in the immediate
aftermath of such operations, and that it was in this early period that
the most important information makes its way past the censors. Piper had
shown for years in his pieces how, in the early hours following any
operation, there remains crucial material in ferreting out the truth of
what really happened. I learned this lesson after Oklahoma City when
reports surfaced in the immediate hours after the explosion that there
were multiple bombs still inside the Alfred P. Murrah Building. Yet by
day’s end there was no mention of these items, despite the fact that
there had been raw video footage seen by millions of people in the
opening hours that showed bomb squads gingerly carrying out explosive
September 11th, I watched with fanatical concentration the initial
coverage just to make sure that it wasn’t an accident of some sort. When
I heard about a second plane hitting the Trade Towers, I knew that an
operation was in full swing. From what I had been reading before and
after Bush’s election, everything indicated that America was going to
war again in the Middle East, only this time in a much larger fashion
than had taken place in the previous decade. I had read newspaper
reports of the planned operations that were brewing in Afghanistan two
months before 9- 11 took place. George Bush Jr., son of the man who in
1991 had first taken America to war for the benefit of the Jewish state,
had now (under his father’s direction, no doubt) surrounded himself
with people who were all tied to big-time oil interests. He had been
given a “thumbs up” from the Israel First Lobby, and had an
unprecedented amount of money in his campaign.
all of this meant was obvious to me: it would only be a matter of
minutes before the Zionist-owned media in America was going to blame
this on some swarthy, smelly, murderous Muslim organization in order to
justify a full-scale war in the Middle East. As it turned out, it only
did take minutes.
hours of this taking place, my phone was ringing off the wall. All my
friends who knew of my Middle Eastern descent wanted to know what I
thought of all this. It was a maddening experience, in all honesty. Even
the ones who had come to distrust the government/media complex over the
last few years still possessed an inclination to ‘run home to momma’ at
times such as these and refused to afford any credibility to what I had
to say. As I explained things such as Zionism and the agenda it
possessed to eventually grab up all the land and oil in the Middle East,
all I received were uninterested stares and uncomfortable silences.
Like the rest of America, they preferred a ‘drive through’ version of
the truth that was quickly prepared and easily digested. Besides,
Islamic fundamentalism sounded so much more interesting to individuals
such as these with their politically uneventful lives. They were, for
the most part, conservative Christians who were fed-up with their faith
and values being attacked, and therefore vented this pent-up anger at
what was at that time a very convenient target, meaning those in the
Muslim world. Despite my best apologetics, there was no convincing them
of the fact that they were being snookered by the same people who were
responsible for dragging Christian culture into the sewer in the first
And it was at
that moment, in a very small way, that I under- stood what an
exhausting task it was trying to bring truth to a people who did not
want to hear it … of trying to make them see an elephant in a room that
was impossible to miss, yet which they refused to acknowledge. I was
pulling my hair out, and this had only been over the course of a few
months. It was then that I came to hold in awe those individuals who had
been doing this same thing for years, and yet who kept on going. They
were, in the words used by Jesus, the first to stand up against the
Jewish supremacist agenda, prophets without honor in their own home; and for me, the one at the top of that list was Michael Collins Piper.
that moment I recognized my responsibility in this matter, It was to
not sit by and watch as these men, the Michael Collins Pipers of the
world, do all the work for our benefit. They were the watchmen trying to
expose the nature of this beast that threatened to devour us all. Were
it not for the fact that they were, literally speaking, risking life,
liberty and pursuit of happiness for the rest of us, we would have been
mere statistics by now. The gangsters whom they were trying to expose
were like vampires who feared the light of day more than anything, and
in this case the light of day was the truth that men such as Michael
Collins Piper was shining on their actions. He and the others like him
were not supermen, they could only do so much and could only go so far,
and if there weren’t individuals who were willing to take up the torch
for them at the end of the day, then the fire was going to die for sure …
and it was at this moment that I decided to take up that torch as well.
September 11, 2005
Mark Glenn is the author of No Beauty in the Beast: Israel Without Her Mascara.