Bushes vs Kennedys / Mary Meyer & JFK
(Live from Jim's JFK 50th Memorial conference)
Friday, November 22, 2013
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
PLEASE SUPPORT REVERE RADIO:
SUBSCRIBE to the RSS feed
DONATE to Scholars for 9/11 Truth:
---------
(Right-click on guest name to download mp3)
SUBSCRIBE to the iTunes feed
STREAM premieres on Revere Radio
5pm CST (2300 GMT) M-W-F:
---
Congratulations on the success of the Santa Barbara JFK conference! I have something I would like to share about the assassination. A few years ago, I saw a version of the Z-film that had something I thought unusual on Commerce Street South of the Limo. At the time of the assassination there was a large truck (like you might rent for moving) parked on Commerce Street. The sides of the cargo area had some type of cloth or canvas covering. This truck was parked directly where Dr. Fetzer has postulated a shot was fired at the limo from the South. This truck would have been an ideal snipers platform. Despite the reliability one must consider given alterations of the Z-film, the truck is too large to have been airbrushed. When James Tague was on the show a few months ago promoting his new book, he stated the traffic had come to a complete halt on Commerce St. He would have had a great vantage point behind this truck and he has usually been referred to as an "innocent " bystander at the Triple Underpass. I did find it odd he was so dismissive of the limo stop that so many witnesses saw.
ReplyDeleteTodd, I find this fascinating. Let's correspond about this via email. My address is jfetzer@d.umn.edu. Thanks.
ReplyDeleteConsidering the debate between me and Hankey & King, I am very disappointed by what Hankey said about LBJ:
ReplyDeleteWEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 2, 2013
Jim Fetzer vs. Gary King & John Hankey
Was LBJ the pivotal player in the assassination of JFK?
POSTED BY TOTAL AT 11:26 PM 55 COMMENTS:
I have no doubt that LBJ was the pivotal player in JFK.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0102138/quotes
ReplyDeleteJim Garrison: Could the Mob [substitute Lyndon Johnson or GHW Bush for "Mob" and see if your case holds up.] change the parade route, or eliminate the protection for the President? Could the Mob send Oswald to Russia and get him back? Could the Mob get the FBI the CIA, and the Dallas Police to make a mess of the investigation? Could the Mob appoint the Warren Commission to cover it up? could the Mob wreck the autopsy? Could the Mob influence the national media to go to sleep? And since when has the Mob used anything but .38's for hits, up close. The Mob wouldn't have the guts or the power for something of this magnitude. Assassins need payrolls, orders, times, schedules. This was a military-style ambush from start to finish... a coup d'etat with Lyndon Johnson waiting in the wings.
Jim Garrison: The FBI says they can prove it through physics in a nuclear laboratory. Of course they can prove it. Theoretical physics can also prove that an elephant can hang off a cliff with its tail tied to a daisy! But use your eyes, your common sense.
I agree with your gist, though in fact LBJ could have had a hand in many of the intragovernmental aspects you mention.
DeleteLBJ sympathizers could indeed do much of what you write about here, as logistics, but more than LBJ would have to have given international okay, support, be in the know, help funnel the money (esp. through Permindex). It took far more than LBJ, not wholly liked and not extremely charismatic, to want this and do it. It is far more likely he was fully on side and helped, not quite waiting in the wings, but involved in the sense of a main honcho for inside-government channels, not the main player in the most important sense. I doubt there was a main player in any ordinary sense!
I agree with your point, Joan. Claire, I wouldn't say "inside-government channels", but "supra-governmental channels". I think you're on the right track saying that there had to be "international...support", but I think you've got it upside-down (anyway, I prefer to call it "transnational"). The perpetrators were the support for a transnational plot, taking account of these two facets: (1) the leadership in the post-war German government (Conrad Adenauer and his circle) as well as the Italian secret service Sifra (General Giovanni de Lorenzo) took part in Operation Gladio, as well as the leadership of NATO; and (2) sufficient evidence exists to link Gladio intimately with Permindex, on the board of which sat Clay Shaw and the Hungarian fascist leader Ferenc Nagy (CEO)and among the principal financiers of which were H. L. Hunt, Clint Murchison, John Connally, George and Herman Brown of Brown and Root, and ex-Nazi General Walter Dohrnberger, and his company, Bell Aerospace. There are ties to both Edmund Rothschild and David Rockefeller, and many more to NASA and the leading transnational fascist organizations, such as the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations, which figures so prominently in the administrations of Nixon and Reagan. I enjoyed John Hankey's presentation much more this time--I think he's on the right track.
DeleteClare Kuehn-
DeleteThat's all very well, Clare.......
But where does your PID (Paul Is Dead) theory (hoax) fit into all this?
Btw, Clare cut out your sniping against Professor James Fetzer.
Professor Fetzer has already demonstrated conclusively that LBJ
played a pivotal rôle in the assassination of JFK.
Fetzer is heavy on opinion but weak on conclusively demonstrating anything.
DeleteIf he has "conclusively" demonstrated anything, it will stand up to debate.
This guy is a shill who has been dogging me for years. If he had any specific criticism to make, he would make it. Cite what I have said and why I have said it and then explain what I have wrong and how you know. You love to make vague smears but have yet to show I have anything wrong.
DeleteJim, calling people shills is the easy way out. My comment was directed more at a person accusing Clare of sniping more than attacking any position you have.
DeleteThat being said, my statement is a sound one in that any position you have, if based on evidence, will stand up to debate.
I disagree with you on your evidence proving complicity by the secret service and think it more evidence of incompetence by the secret service.
That's all...no need to go overboard. I haven't smeared you at all....I could have, but then you would have just deleted the post.
@Ron Gibson. I can so hear you snickering like a prepubescent dork, totally satisfied with the "humor" in his little sarcastic snipe at Clare. Paul is dead. The photographic evidence proves it. Doubles are an admitted reality. In the future, you will be viewed as a fool, same as the people who believe Oswald acted alone.
DeleteAre you seriously equating the assassination of JFK with Clare Kuehn's delusional PID hogwash?? Clare's so-called photographic evidence proves ZILCH. Forget about the future!! Right now, you and Clare are viewed as deranged and deluded assholes. In future, keep Clare's
DeletePID bullshit out of the JFK assassination debate. We don't need any contamination from Clare Kuehn's insane and fantasist Paul-Is-Dead crap.
No one gives a fuck how you view anything Tom. You aren't queen of conspiracy land and you don't get to decide what anyone talks about. Two photos of two different people who are purportedly the same person actually proves a lot, but again I don't expect mongoloids to understand simple logic and argumentation. I mean, seriously you are acting like a shill. Your post screams fake outrage and you sound like the MSM with your "arguments." Do a better job if you want to earn your paycheck.
DeleteJim, are you saying LBJ was the pivotal palyer? If you ever say this again, it would be much more to the credit of work on LBJ to give a context: the current research on him is wonderful about how he was the pivotal intragovernmental channels arranger. But he was ONLY in that sense the mastermind. There was a conspiratorial masterminding, not one man. Others worked with and through LBJ, but the pressures to kill and arrange were far more on others, even if LBJ had actually first suggested the death itself, and it is unlikely, given that he actually did speak of it before his death. Even if he did suggest it, the masterminding was broad. I have no doubt the oil boys and financier CIA cabal supporters, and even international support was not merely let in on it, but was the main force which got the idea realized, developed, stuck to.
ReplyDeleteI couldn't agree more, Clare.
DeleteI think there is a misunderstanding here. During my Santa Barbara presentation, I distinguished between SPONSORS, FACILITATORS, and MECHANICS. LBJ was the key facilitator. I will be glad to have your comments on the next show coming up.
DeleteI think the plot originated with Ben-Gurion and the Mossad. They enlisted their buddy LBJ to coordinate the US side of things. It was a true coup d'état. After Kennedy was killed Israel has dominated the US political landscape. The most obvious subversion has been the massive foreign wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for Israel's benefit.
DeleteThe common thread between JFK and 9/11 is the Israeli nuclear weapons program. JFK was taken out because he was going to put a halt to Israel building nukes. Ben-Gurion viewed Kennedy as a threat to the survival of Israel so he had to go.
Israeli nukes destroyed the WTC buildings and part of the Pentagon on 9/11. These big historical events have one thing in common: Israeli nuclear domination of the Middle East.
Introduction, "THE TAKING OF AMERICA, 1-2-3", 1985
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/ToA/ToAintro.html
The Kennedy assassination was but one of many crimes against the Kennedy family and others. All have the same basic MO and therefore suggest the same people have committed all of the crimes. JFK, MLK, RFK, the set-up of Edward Kennedy at Chappaquiddick--all designed to eliminate anyone in government who is not controllable by the Power Elite. Since this book was written, another Kennedy, John Jr., has died under mysterious circumstances.
This is an excellent book which you can read free online at the above website.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This book is not about assassinations, at least not solely about assassinations. It is not just another book about who murdered President Kennedy or how or why. It is a book about power, about who really controls the United States policies, especially foreign policies. It is a book about the process of control through the manipulation of the American presidency and the presidential election process. The objective of the book is to expose the clandestine, secret, tricky methods and weapons used for this manipulation, and to reveal the degree to which these have been hidden from the American public.
Assassinations are only one of many techniques used in this control process. They have been important only in the sense that they are the ultimate method used in the control of the election process. Viewed in this way, an understanding of what happened to John or Robert Kennedy becomes more important because it leads to a total understanding of what has happened to our country, and to us, since 1960. But the important thing to understand is the control and the power and all of the clandestine methods put together.
Thanks for that link to the still-valuable 1976 book by Richard Sprague, Joan. I had forgotten it was still up at ratical.org.
DeleteHowever, that site has also long been the home of vintage rants and expose's by the mysterious John Judge, that "child of the Pentagon" who so brilliantly dissected Jonestown but later discredited himself by "hugging the planes" of 9/11 so tightly that you'd think he would burst a gut.
Hmmmm.....
WHY KENNEDY HAD TO BE KILLED: WHAT WERE HIS CRIMES?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.weboflove.org/e/john-kennedy-assassination-facts-theories
=Kennedy sacks CIA leaders
We know how JFK reacted to the CIA's setting him up. He was furious. When the enormity of the Bay of Pigs disaster came home to him, he said he wanted "to splinter the CIA in a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds."
=JFK alienates CIA and Pentagon
JFK had to confront the unspeakable in the Missile Crisis in the form of total nuclear war. At the height of that terrifying conflict, he felt the situation spiraling out of control, especially because of the actions of his generals.
=Committing heresy for peace
At American University on June 10, 1963, President Kennedy proposed an end to the Cold War. Kennedy's rejection of "a Pax Americana" was an act of resistance to the military-industrial complex. The military-industrial complex was totally dependent on "a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war."
=Nuclear test ban treaty
The president had done an end run around the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He negotiated the Test Ban Treaty without consulting them, because they opposed it.
On September 20, Kennedy spoke to the United Nations. He suggested that its members see the Test Ban Treaty as a beginning and engage together in an experiment in peace:
=JFK reaches out to Cuba
In the month leading up to the assassination, Kennedy and Castro actually began a dialogue on normalizing U.S.-Cuban relations, through the mediation of French journalist Jean Daniel who personally visited both men.
=JFK's top-secret order to begin withdrawal from Vietnam
Kennedy decided on his policy of withdrawal from Vietnam, against the arguments of most of his advisers, at a contentious National Security Council meeting on October 2.
THE JFK ASSASSINATION
ReplyDeleteTHE ROLE OF THE CIA: PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY
http://www.weboflove.org/e/john-kennedy-assassination-facts-theories
John F. Kennedy took far too many steps towards peace and away from the secret agendas of his war-hungry generals and rich industrialists. His behavior simply could not be tolerated by those who stood to lose billions of dollars from his ever-growing resolve to create more peace in our world.
'Plausible deniability'
In the 1950s, under the leadership of CIA Director Allen Dulles, the doctrine of "plausible deniability" became the CIA's green light to assassinate national leaders, conduct secret military operations, and overthrow governments that our government thought were on the wrong side in the Cold War.
"Plausible deniability" meant our intelligence agencies, acting as paramilitary groups, had to lie and cover their tracks so effectively that there would be no trace of U.S. government responsibility for criminal activities on an ever-widening scale.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Truman warns about the CIA
"We have grown up as a nation, respected for our free institutions and for our ability to maintain a free and open society. There is something about the way the CIA has been functioning that is casting a shadow over our historic position and I feel that we need to correct it."
During the Cold War, the hidden growth of the CIA's autonomous power corresponded to the public growth of what was called a fortress state. A democratic national security state is a contradiction in terms.
The insecure basis of our security then became weapons that could destroy the planet. To protect the security of that illusory means of security, which was absolute destructive power, we now needed a ruling elite of national security managers with an authority above that of our elected representatives.
So from that point on, our military-industrial managers made the real decisions of state. President Truman simply ratified their decisions and entrenched their power, as he did with the establishment of the CIA, and as his National Security Council did with its endorsement of plausible deniability.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Kennedy sacks CIA leaders
We know how JFK reacted to the CIA's setting him up. He was furious. When the enormity of the Bay of Pigs disaster came home to him, he said he wanted "to splinter the CIA in a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds."
He ordered an investigation into the whole affair, under the very watchful eyes of his brother, Attorney General Robert Kennedy. He fired CIA Director Allen Dulles, Deputy Director Richard Bissell, Jr., and Deputy Director General Charles Cabell. That was a huge decision — firing the top of the CIA's hierarchy, including the legendary leader who had come to personify the agency, Allen Dulles.
The president then took steps "to cut the CIA budget in 1962 and again in 1963, aiming at a 20 percent reduction by 1966." He was cutting back the CIA's power in very concrete ways, step by step.
LBJ may have been a covert Zionist, an election-fraud veteran, a outright crook in the pocket of the oil barons, and even a murderer -- but he did help prevent race war in this country by using his mighty political muscle to force passage of civil rights laws before the Jim Crow pressure cooker exploded. And he may also have had a hand in preventing nukes from flying between Russia and the USA in 1963.
ReplyDeleteIn the very tricky business of dissecting the falsehoods of official history, one should never forget that there are often competing factions within factions -- and parallel conspirators plotting either to exploit, cancel, enhance, or re-direct the conspiracies of other plotters.
A prime case in point: the JFK Murder.
In 1961 the fascistic Joint Chiefs of Staff passionately wanted to invade Cuba and humiliate Russia, even at the risk of WWIII, which they were "sure" was winnable. ("We might get our hair mussed, but...") When all previous attempts to enlist the uncooperative young President in their mad scheme failed (the Cuban Missle Crisis, Operation Northwoods, et. al.) they opted instead to lend their support to one of the several ongoing plots, swirling about the Washington underworld at the time, to assassinate him... and blame Castro for sponsoring the deed!
Cooler (albeit still malevolent) heads prevailed (i.e. LBJ, Hoover, Warren, the intel spooks, etc.) and WWIII was providentially averted by their tightly controlling the subsequent "investigation" and assuring the public that Ozzie was NOT a "Castro agent" (despite all the planted evidence to that effect which then had to be discredited and discarded) but merely a "crazed lone nut".
JFK's multitudinous enemies (the Mob, Big Oil, the Fed Banksters, nuke-craving Israel, the Langley Boys, etc.) were all delighted to get a new Prez who had pledged to be far more permissive of their various evil agendas -- and even the generals and the arms merchants were quickly placated with the promise of a huge, protracted, proxy war in Southeast Asia, one that would not only enrich the merchants of violent death (via billions for fresh bombs, guns, planes and helicopters) but also secure the essential-to-the-money-laundering-banksters heroin trade from the Golden Triangle, for decades to come.
A more recent example: The OKC Bombing.
(continued...)
(continuing...)
DeleteThe Neocon/Israel-firster/PNAC fanatics were absolutely delighted when the generals helped them convince Daddy Bush to stage the 1991 Gulf War, essential as it was in keeping the Military-Industrial Complex humming after the 1989 Collapse of the Soviet Empire robbed the USA of a formidable "enemy".
But when the Iraqi Army had been successfully driven out of Kuwait and thoroughly decimated (via war-crime style massacring) during their long march of retreat, Bush the Elder took the generals' advice to declare victory and quit cold. A boots-on-the-ground invasion of Bagdad, they argued, would be foolhardy and too costly, since it would then entail several years of occupation, insurgency, and nation-building. But the Zionist Fifth Column was far from satisfied with this insufficiently bloody state of affairs, leaving in place as it did a sworn enemy of "The Chosen State," no matter how weakened by defeat and sanctions. So, the plotters employed their massive political-manipulation machinery to deny Daddy B a second term and began banking on a new, comparably spooked-up Oval Office tenant (the bastard Rockefeller descendant and sex maniac from Mena) to do their dirty work.
The casus belli (to justify an all-out invasion of Iraq) they settled on was a false-flag event to take place not in the Mideast, but in the American Heartland -- namely Oklahoma City. And why, you might ask..,
Because it was a city rich with credible patsies, namely a local population which four years earlier been supplemented by the RESETTLEMENT OF A LARGE CADRE OF IRAQIS who had been granted asylum in the USA after they had rendered "services" to the American military in its rout of Saddam's once-mighty forces. "Could some of these so-called refugees have been concealing their continuing loyalty to Saddam?" the sayanim-controlled media would quickly and loudly ask, in the wake of the bombs going off at the Federal Building -- and the hunt would be on to catch the "dark-skinned, Mideastern-looking" villains who had sought to violently avenge their dear leader's 1991 defeat at American hands.
Once caught, the patsies would be neatly framed with "slam-dunk" evidence that they were acting on orders from Bagdad, and because of the horrendous carnage (think of the little children butchered in the daycare centre!) Congress would have no choice but to authorise invasive war with (Israel's longtime enemy) IRAQ!
(continued...)
(continuing...)
DeleteBut the neocons' warmongering part of the plot was ultimately FOILED, apparently by other clever factions within the "shadow government" with different immediate priorities, namely storing-and-destroying certain government records harmful to the Clintonistas, and ramping up domestic paranoia about militia-style "hate groups in the Heartland" whose existence would help justify enacting (unconstitutional, of course) new police-state statutes. The behind-the-scenes struggle between the factions lasted a mere 72 hours, after which the media drumbeat about "dark-skinned Mideastern-looking" suspects ceased abruptly, to be replaced by a burgeoning narrative about a disgruntled ex-soldier who foolishly went for a drive without license plates.
And the Zionist Fifth Column bided their time for a season and more, confident that the generals and the spooks and the arms merchants and the banksters would eventually find common cause again in making war on Iraq. And they finally did, but only as grudging payback for acquiescence in the staging of 9/11, which had as its primary goal the re-stabilisation of a global heroin trade that had by 2001 shifted its primary sourcing from Southeast Asia to the hills of Afghanistan.
Toppling Saddam, while of prime importance to the Zio-faction, was distinctly a lesser priority of the other factions.
But hey, they finally pulled off BOTH mass-murder/human-sacrifice rituals (two invasions/wars/occupations in less than two years) on quite a grand scale after all, didn't they, despite some factional differences along the way.
Yes, LBJ was a pretty evil dude for his time, but he does appear to have helped the USA avoid both race war and nuclear war. The Viet Nam bloodbath wasn't his creation either, but he allowed it to blossom and it posioned his legacy -- rightly so. (And Wall Street would never have allowed his War on Poverty to succeed anyway, as more recent history has so brutally demonstrated.)
But pinning the blame on "Lyin' Lyndon" for "masterminding" the Dallas plot is giving the old scumbag WAY too much credit for covert powers and connections he never even came close to having. IMHO this is just another disinfo-distraction from seeing the REAL powerbrokers behind that tawdry curtain their mass media has dragged out again... on this, the half-century commemoration of their November treachery -- complicated as it was by various plots and counterplots within the main plot.
" IMHO this is just another disinfo-distraction from seeing the REAL powerbrokers behind that tawdry curtain their mass media has dragged out again"
ReplyDeleteI think I basically agree with that.
LBJ did the civil rights act passage thing as a purely selfish political move on his part, according to Roger Stone and his book (see recent interview on this channel). He put a "poison pill" clause in the bill that said that violations of the Act could only be tried in state courts and no Sourthern states are going to convict a White guy -- something like that. So whatever good lifelong segregationis LBJ may have done in averting a race war was purely accidental. That too sounds plausible to me.
Problem is Roger Stone and his book, about which he will speak about in a visit to my town next Tuesday, completely leaves out LBJ's Zionist ways and his probably Jewish ethnicity. Stone criticizes Robert Caro for leaving out Billy Sol Estes matter from his book, but this long-time Republican strategist and consultant leaves out this equally monumentally important and relevant information about LBJ from his very popular book.
See also....
http://5tjt.com/our-first-jewish-president-lyndon-johnson-an-update/
Our First Jewish President Lyndon Johnson? – an update!!
What did you all think of the TV fare for this very important 50th anniversary weekend? Dealey Plaza was turned into a patriotic memorial. The movies were out of date documentaries.
ReplyDeleteThe only new material shown was a two hour documentary "The Assassination of the President." Did anyone see it? It is new and we see all the aged researchers like Mark Lane and Vincent Bugliosi. I was interested in a clip of Lane on the Johnny Carson Show in which he is reproaching David Susskind for media cropping a photograph of the TSDB that showed Jack Ruby standing out in front at the time of the assassination.
C-Span played a tape of, now 81 year old, Ruth Paine from earlier this month during which she rambled on about Marina and Lee and how Lee shot at General Walker and how she provided the police with clues and help. No one seemed interested in any Q & A. Paine was so dotty.
Now that we have been, once again, morally and intellectually outraged by yet another disgusting November avalanche of CIA/Mossad-influenced JFK "documentaries" polluting the various "non-fiction" cable-TV channels, let's take a wider look at the possibly interlocking agenda items ALSO spewed forth by the producers and purveyors of all this Discovery Channel/History Channel/Military Channel/National Geographic Channel, etc. SLIME and SLEAZE:
DeleteI would say it behooves us to consider that the very same "nonfiction" channels that keep laying it on thick with "Oswald-the-lone-nut" AND "Osama-toppled-the-towers" pseudo-documentaries, month after month and year after year, are ALSO the very same channels that keep bombarding viewers with a seemingly endless stream of "Ancient Aliens," "UFOs piloted by ETs" and "Masonic Symbolism/Ancient Egypt" propaganda -- for literally hundreds of hours each year.
Esotericists Picknett and Prince nailed this booga-booga intel-agency scam shortly before 9/11 occurred, when they published their still-in-print, covert-op expose' book titled "The Stargate Conspiracy". Distressed as these seemingly sincere occultists were to discover that today's covert-ops spooks have been "co-opting" the ancient gods of Egypt all over the place in the post-Roswell era, the offended authors warned of more bizarre deceptions, drenched in occult symbolism (as 9/11 was soon to be) yet to come -- conjured up from the bowels of Langley, Tavistock, etc.
So... could the covert-ops boys' NEXT CGI-powered false flag be a (simulated) attack-saucer, heading straight for the White House -- or maybe the UN headquarters? Is that what it would take to seriously frighten and forcibly unite the recalcitrant governments of the world (under a "benevolent" new leader, of course) to do ultra high-tech battle with an utterly terrifying THREAT FROM SPACE???
Sound too far-fetched for serious consideration?
Then just remember Ronnie Ray-gun's "slip of the tongue" about fighting a literal "Star Wars" someday against invading ETs. And long before that curious pontification, General Macarthur was quoted to similar, suspicious effect.
Kinda reminds me of that alleged "Three World Wars" prophecy attributed to a certain, 19th Century general whose Washington D.C. statue gets picketed regularly by the LaRouchies.
(But the Potomac pigeons do a much better of job of dissing it with their droppings, IMHO.)
Oliver Stone was given about ten minutes on the Katie Couric show, Friday, during which he announced his new project about the "untold history" of the United States. Here is Stone talking about it to Amy Goodman.
ReplyDeleteEver since the end of WWII, the U.S. had become a national security state, gearing up to fight Communism and building up more and more nuclear weapons. JFK, after his experience during the Cuban missile crisis, became a man of peace around the globe opening detente with Gorbachev and challenging military authority.
Oliver Stone on 50th Anniversary of JFK Assassination & the Untold History of the United States | Democracy Now!
http://www.democracynow.org/2013/11/5/oliver_stone_on_50th_anniversary_of
How is it that Stone is able to write truthful movies about conspiracies which others can't get away with?
"How is it that Stone is able to write truthful movies about conspiracies which others can't get away with?"
ReplyDeleteI have never viewed the entire movie but I think I would say only that his movie was mostly truthful, much more so than any other movie on the subject. But the movie leaves out some what I am coming to think is extremely relevant information, that is, the people named in the book, Final Judgement, and their strong connections to Israel, the Mossad, and Mossad money laundering entity - Permindex.
Now we have long-time Hollywood Jewish movie producer with dual US/Israeli citizenship, Arnon Milchon, admitting that he has been a spy for Israel all these years.
http://movies.msn.com/movies/article.aspx?news=840723
This fifth columnist not only paid Jim Marrs $200,000 for the screen rights to Marrs' book, Crossfire, but also had financial control over the movie, JFK. I understand Milchon also was a major arms dealer for Israel. So all of this makes you wonder if Stone's movie was just another limited hangout.
I realize that considering the Israeli / Mossad / Zionist connections when analyzing all these conspiracies over the years really was something that just was not done up until may about the last 15 years or so and that that may be the reason why so much of the work of our best researchers left out this information for so many years and perhaps should not be blamed for the omission.
I thank Dr. Fetzer for coming forward with this kind of information in his work.
JEANON, Thanks for the tip. Aaron Milchan was executive producer of "JFK." We have been wondering for the past 20 years who backed this film. Now we know and this casts new light on everything, doesn't it?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.sott.net/article/269228-Billionaire-Hollywood-producer-behind-Stones-JFK-movie-Aaron-Milchan-was-secret-operative-for-Israels-illegal-nukes-program-and-Mossad-arms-dealer
Comment: Guess what other movie Milchan produced?
Oliver Stone's JFK.
As well-made and informative as Stone's movie is, it's quite possible that, unbeknownst to Stone even, the Zionists stepped in to 'help' this movie in order to keep the focus on U.S. intelligence involvement, to the total exclusion of any mention of possible Israeli involvement.
How many Americans know today that JFK was their only President to ever confront the Israelis over their nuke program and to draft a UN resolution in FAVOR of the unconditional right of return for Palestinian refugees?
When it comes to Israeli interests, people have met untimely ends for way less...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This excellent site discusses the difference between three theories: 1. The CIA did it. 2. LBJ masterminded it. 3. The Mossad and Zionists were behind it.
Who killed Kennedy: CIA, LBJ, or the Truly "Unspeakable"?
http://www.sott.net/article/269027-Who-killed-Kennedy-CIA-LBJ-or-the-Truly-Unspeakable
It now appears that Israeli having nukes was the main reason for the assassination, to me anyway. We look at the latest diversions of LBJ masterminding the event and learn that LBJ had a long history of working to send US money and arms to Israel, many years before 1963.
ReplyDeleteJim Marrs' latest updated edition of Crossfire has one sentence in it lightly referring to the theory of the Israel / Mossad connection.
James Angleton was high-level CIA and he had strong connections to the Mossad so that illuminates the CIA / Mossad connections, something I have always wanted more specifically proven, especially in regard to 9-11.
I was amazed to see Mark Lane and others on
ReplyDeleteC-SPAN 3 this weekend. What a treat! Joan Mellen is an expert on the Jim Garrison Clay Shaw trial. Rex Bradford is an expert on the House Select Committee on Assassinations findings on CIA assassinations outside of the US.
Kennedy Assassination Conspiracy Theories, Mark Lane and Joan Mellen - C-SPAN Video Library
Kennedy Assassination Conspiracy Theories, Rex Bradford - C-SPAN Video Library
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/Lanea
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/Conspira
ReplyDeleteKennedy Assassination Conspiracy Theories, Panel Discussion - C-SPAN Video Library
Duquesne University Wecht Institute of Forensic Science and Law
Panelists discussed the findings in the U.S. government’s official investigations of the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy, from the Warren Commission in 1964 to the Assassination Records Review Board in 1998. ..
They spoke at “Passing the Torch,” an international symposium on the 50th anniversary of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. The event was sponsored by the Cyril H. Wecht Institute of Forensic Science and Law at Duquesne University.
Alcorn, Daniel
Assasination Archives and Research Center
Bradford, Rex
Vice President Assassination Archives and Research Center
Hardway, Dan
Attorney
Lesar, James
President Assassination Archives and Research Center
Mellen, Joan
Professor Temple University->English
Tanenbaum, Robert K.
Attorney
Mark Lane read this editorial by Harry Truman which appeared in the Washington Post December 22, 1963 about the dangers of the CIA at that time.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.maebrussell.com/Prouty/Harry%20Truman's%20CIA%20article.html
The Washington Post
December 22, 1963 - page A11
Harry Truman Writes:
Limit CIA Role
To Intelligence
By Harry S Truman
Copyright, 1963, by Harry S Truman
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
INDEPENDENCE, MO., Dec. 21 — I think it has become necessary to take another look at the purpose and operations of our Central Intelligence Agency—CIA. At least, I would like to submit here the original reason why I thought it necessary to organize this Agency during my Administration, what I expected it to do and how it was to operate as an arm of the President..........
For some time I have been disturbed by the way CIA has been diverted from its original assignment. It has become an operational and at times a policy-making arm of the Government. This has led to trouble and may have compounded our difficulties in several explosive areas.
I never had any thought that when I set up the CIA that it would be injected into peacetime cloak and dagger operations.
Some of the complications and embarrassment I think we have experienced are in part attributable to the fact that this quiet intelligence arm of the President has been so removed from its intended role that it is being interpreted as a symbol of sinister and mysterious foreign intrigue—and a subject for cold war enemy propaganda
....... I, therefore, would like to see the CIA be restored to its original assignment as the intelligence arm of the President, and that whatever else it can properly perform in that special field—and that its operational duties be terminated or properly used elsewhere.
.....There is something about the way the CIA has been functioning that is casting a shadow over our historic position and I feel that we need to correct it.
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/Lanea
ReplyDeleteListen to what Lane says about the Secret Service: The CIA printed the credentials for the Secret Service normally done by the Treasury Dept. He also goes into what the SS did that day--slowing down after the first shot when protocol would be to speed up and take evasive action. He talks about Clint Hill whose job it was to protect Mrs. Kennedy and how he heroically caught up with the car just before it sped away.
From Mark Lane's speech on C-SPAN3:
ReplyDeleteArthur Krock of the New York Times made this observation in October of 1963, before the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
http://www.blackopradio.com/krock.htm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The New York Times, October 3,1963
"The Intra-Administration War in Vietnam"
by Arthur Krock
~~~~~~~~~~~~
The CIA's growth was "LIKENED TO A MALIGNANCY" which the very high offical was not sure even the White House could control "ANY LONGER." "If the United States ever experiences an attempt at a coup to overthrow the Government, it will come from the CIA and not the Pentagon". The Agency "represents a tremendous power and total unaccountability to anyone".
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In answer to a question from the audience, Lane thinks the CIA both "orchestrated and carried out the assassination of John F. Kennedy."
The "high official in the White House" Krock is speaking of in the piece above was John Kennedy, yet the Warren Commission never called Krock before the Commission.
ReplyDeleteThe CIA had "tremendous power and total unaccountability to anyone." With this kind of power, there was no need to take orders from Johnson or anyone in government. The CIA worked for the oil companies in overthrowing Iran's Mossedegh by installing the Shah, ridding the Congo of Lamumba, overthrowing Arbenz of Guatemala for United Fruit and others, attempts to kill Castro and so on. There was a long list of threats to the existence of the CIA, to business interests and to the military industrial complex contractors. Throw in the interests of Israel in obtaining nuclear weapons which Kennedy opposed and you have many with motives for a coup d'etat.