 |
 |
 |
Many consider the JFK assassination as that date of the birth of national security state.
|
|
Switchboard | ||||
| Latest | |||||
| Past week | |||||
| Past month | |||||
|
|
|
May 23, 2017 | www.unz.com
Miro23 , May 23, 2017 at 6:25 am GMT
@Erebus WND has a good update on developments, even though it is "according to a WND source close to the situation."...
http://www.wnd.com/2017/05/bar-manager-cops-never-talked-with-staff-about-night-seth-rich-died/The frustration in trying to figure out what is going on is that the world is now full of "sound and fury" signifying, not nothing but the frantic efforts by competing factions to control narratives. The noise is everywhere, all the time, and reading 30k words of crap to glean 1k words of plausibility requires an ongoing investment that's difficult to maintain. So, I've taken a different tack...
Take the Manchester bomb last night. Too early, and too little info for me to come to any sort of conclusion, but nowadays my default position is to assume it's a false flag/hoax and wait for the Grassy Knollers to arrive and dismantle the narrative. Right or wrong, they provide an invaluable yeoman's service in ferreting out what really happened.
I've also come to the understanding that the most salient point of these events is the exploitation that now inevitably follows. The manner, method, and speed with which the soon-to-follow attempt at exploitation propagates is more interesting than the actual event. It's the "Why?" behind the "How?". So, I'll wait to see whether the West should "Bomb Iran/Syria/Yemen!", or if "The Russians did it!" after all. Maybe it was the "Brexit" supporters, or the "Bremains". I don't know at this point, but it will clear up soon. 19-20 dead, so this is big enough to set the stage for somebody's meme.
Apropos the Seth Rich/email saga...
I was excitedly directed to a poster who appeared on 4Chan recently, claiming to be the ER surgeon on duty when Rich was brought in. The poster says the wounds were not life threatening, gives some details of his/her treatment of Rich's routine abdominal gunshot wounds, and weaves a coherent, professional sounding narrative about hospital routines and their disruption by Law Enforcement. All quite plausible, except for the fact that his/her timeline makes no sense, and contradicts what is officially known. Also, (s)he'd be trivial to identify, so why bother with anonymity? IOW, probably a provocation, so I wasted half an hour finding and reading it.
|
|
|
In his new book, political operative and strategist Roger Stone has claimed that former president Lyndon B. Johnson set up John F. Kennedy's assassination, which occurred on November 22, 1963. A former aide to President Reagan and confidante of Richard Nixon makes the claim in his book 'The Man who killed Kennedy - the case against LBJ.' No one man benefitted more from the assassination than Vice President Johnson, the author claims. He spoke to the Voice of Russia about the book.
For those, who don't know of Lyndon Johnson's personality and demeanor, could you describe why he would be the most logical mastermind behind JFK's assassination?
I think the reason why he is the most logical murderer of John Kennedy is that in November of 1963 Lyndon Johnson was a man, who was looking into the abyss. He was tangled up in at least two of the major public corruption scandals of the day: the Bobby Baker scandal Baker was Johnson's right-hand man, who was taking huge bribes on Johnson's behalf in the US Senate and then Billie Sol Estes scandal. Estes was a Texas wheeler dealer businessman who had got millions of dollars in Federal contracts thanks to Lyndon Johnson. Both of those investigations were coming to a head, both of them pointed to corruption by Johnson, corruption of Biblical proportions. And Johnson knew he was going to be dumped from the ticket and probably sent to prison. So, time was running out for Lyndon Johnson. He knew that Life magazine a very prominent American magazine at the time planned a major expose of his financial situation and his corruption. A week after the assassination and that the information for the Life magazine article had been sent to them by attorney general Robert Kennedy who very very much wanted Lyndon Johnson off the national ticket in 1964, so he, Lyndon Johnson is your most likely perpetrator.
You said in your book that Lyndon Johnson's biographer would panic if he's reminded about Wallace. Who was that man and what role did he play in the assassination?
I believe that Malcolm Wallace, who was a long-time associate and hitman for LBJ is the actual killer, I tie Johnson to at least eight murders in Texas prior to John F. Kennedy. These were murders to cover up corruption, they were murders to cover up voter fraud through theft of elections. Johnson had murder in his repertoire. In fact I would go so far as to say that Johnson could order a murder the way you and I would order a sandwich. And it is very important historically to understand that in the immediate aftermath of Kennedy's assassination in order to justify the cover-up to many in the government, in order to get them to go along with the fiction that Lee Harvey Oswald had killed Kennedy, Johnson tried to give the impression that the assassination of John F. Kennedy was done by the Russian State. Johnson told this lie repeatedly in order to get people to go along with the cover-up, because you see, if we don't blame Oswald and we don't claim that he is a lone communist acting by himself and people learn that he is really an agent of a foreign government the Russian government then it would cause a major national incident, needless to say that's all a lie. In fact the KGB according to declassified documents that we got in 1985 the KGB conducted their own totally independent investigation to determine who killed Kennedy. You know what they determined? They said: it was Lyndon Johnson.
What about French intelligence? I mean, Jackie Kennedy asked the France intelligence to determine who killed her husband. So?...
Jackie Kennedy couldn't get any satisfaction from US intelligence services; nobody would tell her what was going on. She went to French intelligence, where she had some relationships you remember Jackie Kennedy was the toast of Paris and she asked them to conduct an investigation. They did. They published that investigation in book form. It's called "Farewell, America!" by James Hepburn and that investigation also pointed the finger at Vice President Lyndon Johnson. Johnson had the unique motive, means, and opportunity to kill. Although he did not act alone. It's very important to understand that Johnson was merely the lynchpin of the conspiracy that I believe involved the CIA they were upset with JFK over the Bay of Pigs fiasco, involved American organized crime. They had given Kennedy 1 million dollars for his 1960 election and then they have promised to steal votes for him and successfully in Chicago, which they did. And in return Bobby Kennedy The Attorney General, and the President's brother - had launched an all-out attack on organized crime and was trying to deport many of the same mafia figures, who had been instrumental in his own brother's election. So, the mob had the motives. And then, of course, there's big Texas oil. President Kennedy was on the cast of repelling the oil depletion allowance and that would have cost Texas oil literary billions. So, everyone in Dallas on the 22nd of November 1963 had a motive for the murder of John Kennedy.
Could you, please, tell me, how you discovered the evidence that the opaque bubble top was removed and JFK never asked for that and actually Vice Presidential aid Bill Moyers said that he did
Bill Moyers is a very prominent American journalist today, but at that time he was on the staff of Vice President Lyndon Johnson. At Love Field he goes to the Secret Service, Moyers goes to the Secret Service and he says and this is quote: "Get that Goddamn bubble, the President wants that goddam bubble top taken off now." Well, two Kennedy aids testified that the president never gave any such an order about removing the opaque top for the Presidential limousine. Although the bubble-top is not bullet-proof, it would have prevented a gunman from a high building from getting an accurate shot because he would not have been able to see the President. And therefore the question that one must ask mister Moyers is: since the President didn't give that order, was it the Vice-President that gave that order? It certainly sounds like it to me.
And in that case, just out of curiosity: what do you think did Kennedy know or at least feel about what was going on around him if so many people were against him?
We know that he did not want to go to Dallas, we know that he was fighting with Lyndon Johnson, we know that the morning before the motorcade Johnson went to President's Kennedy hotel room and he tried to persuade Kennedy to let governor John Connally who was a Johnson protιgι ride in the Vice-president's car and let Senator Ralph Yarborough who was his enemy ride in the President's car in other words in the Death car. And the President refused. He didn't like the symbolism of that, he thought the governor should ride with the President. And they then fought, they had an argument, Johnson stormed out of the room. He was merely trying to move his protιgι out of dangerous way and he failed. But it is important to know that it was Johnson, who insisted on President Kennedy goes to Texas, it was Johnson, who insisted that they take a specific route they drove through Dealey Plaza a rout which required secret service to violate all their own procedures in terms of sealing the buildings at both sides of the street. Any time the President's car drops below forty miles per hour that's supposed to be a requirement they did it in Houston, they did that in San Antonio the day before, but the buildings weren't sealed in Dallas. It's supposed to be 6 motorcycle policemen three on either side of the President's car: there were in Huston, there were in San Antonio, there were in Chicago the week before, there were in Miami two weeks before, but in Dallas that day there were only two police officers on motorcycles and they were ordered to ride behind the rear bumper of the President's car. There're supposed to be two Secret Service agents on the rear bumper riding the rear bumper they were ordered off in Dallas. There supposed to be two Secret Service agents walking on either side of the car, when it drops below 20 miles per hour they were ordered off. So, there's a lot of anomalies, a lot of violations of standard procedure that are very hard to explain other than say: I believe the US Secret Service also played a role laying down on President Kennedy that day in November.
How did JFK's death affect society, people's minds? Is the impact still present in your opinion?
I think it certainly changed our policy very dramatically I think we moved it back into the Cold War. After the death of John F. Kennedy the important conversations between the Russian State and the United States were damaged. We know, because it was historically recorded that Nikita Khrushchev wept, when he heard of the death of Kennedy. There was an American journalist who was with Fidel Castro, when he was distraught what he learned: he said over and over again "this is very bad, this is very bad" I think we were engaged we were beginning to engage in some fruitful conversations in terms of easing the tensions between our countries and I think there were those in the Pentagon, those in the US military, those in our US-based intelligent services who were very unhappy about that direction. I think it is a major factor not the factor, - but a major factor in getting John F. Kennedy killed.
|
|
|
TLR (California USA) - See all my reviewsGarrison' side of the story,
August 3, 2013 "...our Government is the CIA and the Pentagon, with Congress reduced to a debating society...We won't build Dachaus and Auschwitzes; the clever manipulation of the mass media is creating a concentration camp of the mind that promises to be far more effective in keeping the populace in line...I've learned enough about the machinations of the CIA in the past year to know that this is no longer the dream world America I once believed in...Huey Long once said, 'Fascism will come to America in the name of anti-fascism.'I'm afraid, based on my own experience, that fascism will come to America in the name of national security." - Garrison's interview given to Playboy magazine in October 1967
Since 9/11, and the growth of the National Security State under Bush and Obama, that quote now seems a lot less paranoid today than it did 46 years ago. The existence of the NSA was not even known to the public back then.
Nonetheless, I've always had mixed feelings about Garrison. His heart was in the right place, and his ultimate targets were probably the right ones, but his methods were often questionable. He sometimes had an "end-justifies-the-means" mentality. There's no doubt today that Clay Shaw was associated with US intelligence, but I doubt that he was involved in the JFK plot itself. More likely he was one of Oswald's handlers, and given the compartmentalization of such a project, may not have known how Oswald would ultimately be used (the same is probably true of people like George De Mohrenschildt and Guy Banister). If Garrison could have continued his investigation privately, without being exposed by the press, things might have turned out differently.
Still, with better witnesses and suspects either dead or uncooperative, or living in states where he couldn't extradite them, Garrison rolled the dice with a very weak case and hoped something would break loose. It didn't. The mainstream media went on the attack, rushing out a flood of books questioning his integrity and sanity: Plot or Politics by Rosemary James; Counterplot by Edward J. Epstein; The Garrison Case by Milton Brener; American Grotesque by James Kirkwood. Federal agents did everything possible to disrupt and infiltrate his investigation. Jim DiEugenio's two editions of Destiny Betrayed go into great detail about the powerful forces intent on stopping Garrison.
Eventually, other JFK researchers like Harold Weisberg and Sylvia Meagher turned against him when they saw how he was bluffing his way through the case against Shaw, lining up highly questionable witnesses against him. Every attempt to go after higher-ups failed. Garrison subpoenaed former CIA director Allen Dulles to testify, but Dulles ignored it. He managed to convince the jury that a conspiracy was behind JFK's death, but the evidence of Shaw's involvement was (and is) not enough to convict the man.
|
|
|
Outstanding Book Written With A Flair & With A Wry Sense Of Humor> http://www.amazon.com/Cruel-Shocking-Act-History-Assassination/product-reviews/0805094202/ref=cm_cr_dp_see_all_btm?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescendingBy Stephen Courts on June 20, 2013
Format: Paperback Amazon Verified PurchaseMr. Hurlburt has written an outstanding, easy to follow and logical analysis of the murder of President Kennedy ( and Jefferson Davis Tippet) that is full of facts and written with a wry sense of humor, mocking in a polite way the lame steam media and the various government agencies responsible for the extensive cover-up. I literally was laughing so hard in chapter eight. In this chapter Charles lays out the case (in a dream like scenario) of the prosecutor and his assistant going over the case against LHO. It is really funny how he turns the table of the "airtight" case, DA Wade assigns them.
It is obvious the author has studied the case for almost 50 years and writing this concise 305 page book for almost 20 years. It is well documented and foot noted. He pulls no punches with his description of the perpetuators of the crime of the century and the various layers responsible. I particularly liked the sense of humor as he debunks the government case of the lone nut. It is remarkable he was able to squeeze so much information in such a short book. The description in the "fork in the road" with Earl Warren is superb! It is a case of what if Warren had chosen to do the right thing instead of going along to get along with the government's lone nut scenario. That pretend conversation is worth the price of the book alone.
Having read well over a hundred and fifty books on the murder of President Kennedy, this one stands out for covering so much ground, some new for me, and for the ease of reading. I read it in one day....it was that compelling and well written. The author gives his best estimate of who the guilty parties are and a lot of credit to those that preceded his book. He takes apart Posner and Bugliosi and rightfully blames the lame stream media for their complicity in the cover-up for 49 and 1/2 years.
This book is a great tool for the beginner as well as a valuable reference for the seasoned researcher. I can guarantee you will love this book, if you are not part of the problem, i.e. CIA, FBI, weak ineffective politicians and others who played a part in this monstrous crime or the ensuing cover-up or the believers of the "Johnson Commission". (I get criticized for calling it the Johnson Commission, but that is what it was. He chose all of the commissioners and literally twisted the arm of Chief Justice Warren to give the "Commission some credibility...in fact he told Senator Russell that it would be a rubber stamp of Hoover's FBI "investigation") If allowed, I would give this book SIX stars!
3.0 out of 5 stars This book is a puzzle to me?,November 12, 2013 By
Herbert L Calhoun "paulocal" (Falls Church, VA USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)This review is from: A Cruel and Shocking Act: The Secret History of the Kennedy Assassination (Hardcover)
Fifty years after the fact, it finally reveals details of a veritable bushel of reversible errors committed by the Warren Commission, the FBI, and the CIA, in investigating the JFK assassination. Almost all of these were errors, were errors that the staff lawyers knew about all along, and were errors that had occurred: from Mexico City, to the autopsy, to ignoring key witnesses, to mishandling evidence, to the faulty single bullet theory, to cockamamie theories about Oswald, and on and on -- exactly everything that the so-called crackpot conspiracy theorists and nuts had already reported on in excruciating details. Yet, this author and those staff members have waited decades before reporting to the public on these matters central to a report that was so thoroughly flawed that not even some of the Commissioners themselves would sign on to it?Moreover, and most incredulously of all, the author fails to speculate on why it is that everyone who tried in good faith (as dutiful American citizens are wont to do, like Jim Garrison and Charles William Thomas and a host of contrarian witnesses did), all ended up publicly ostracized, rebuked, transferred, forced out of their jobs, or forced into suicide or worse, ended up dead?
Is this country no longer a democracy? Is it not a profound act of patriotism to try to assist in finding the culprits that shot our 35th president down like a dog it the streets of Dallas Texas at high noon on 11/22/63?
In addition to giving us too little too late, it seems this author's patience with the many questions such gross incompetence and gross errors begs, is infinite -- even fifty years after the fact? The most obvious answer to those questions is this: That maybe, just maybe, the single bullet theory that the Warren Commission advanced (and that not all of whose members would sign on to), is wrong? Just maybe there is an alternative more reasonable non-crackpot, non-conspiracy nut theory that better explains the mishandled facts, discrepancies and errors? I was very disappointed that while the author was quick to cast aspersions on what he referred to as conspiracy theorist crackpots and nuts, he did not once speculate about possible other alternative explanations? Nor did he mention, even in passing that those government bodies that did re-investigated the facts surrounding this case, did indeed conclude that "there was probably a conspiracy in the death of President of John F. Kennedy."
As but one example of the author's infinite patience, the very incident that is the centerpiece of this book and is also the one that ended Mr. Thomas' career and probably caused his suicide as well, is the Oswald Mexico City incident. The non-Warren Commission research on that issue has been done. It is is solid and is way above the "crackpot conspiracy theory" level. It has been so solid in fact that it forced David Atlee Phillips himself, a high-level CIA operative who was running the Oswald Mexico operation, to admit, both at a Conference at USC, and again on his deathbed that he had indeed been the author of this sloppy scenario south of the border, designed to frame Oswald? It hardly matters that Phillips had no choice in the matter but to admit to it, since all of Oswald's actions (if indeed it was Oswald at all. The FBI reported that it was an Oswald double, and the pictures and voice recordings of the person in question were destroyed by the CIA) betrayed a clumsy CIA attempt to preposition a patsy six weeks weeks before the assassination so as to be able to better implicate him later, if needed?
Is it not fair to ask: How is it possible for the CIA operators officer involved to admit to prepositioning a pasty six weeks "before the fact," and there not be a conspiracy? Even stronger proof that there was a high level conspiracy with the CIA at its epicenter, is the fact that James Jesus Angleton, the head of CIA counterintelligence, summarily dismissed Thomas' letter to the Secretary of State about Oswald's supposed maneuvering while in Mexico City a month and a half before the assassination. Again, is it not fair to ask, why would the director of CIA counter intelligence, not be interested in Oswald's maneuverings while in Mexico unless he already knew that they were innocent? Maybe, just maybe, all along he knew something we didn't? Three stars
