Welcome to All Aircraft Are Not Involved.

Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free, so please, make your voice heard!

Time To Get Out The Tinfoil

may also include historical analysis and perspective

Time To Get Out The Tinfoil

Unread postby socrates » Thu Jul 26, 2007 7:41 pm

I just don't like crazy tinfoil that makes it harder for chemtrails to be exposed and stopped. But, yeah, there is a lot of crazy **** that seems 100% fact. For example, there is Prescott Bush and his ties to nazis.

How Bush's grandfather helped Hitler's rise to power

Rumours of a link between the US first family and the Nazi war machine have circulated for decades. Now the Guardian can reveal how repercussions of events that culminated in action under the Trading with the Enemy Act are still being felt by today's president

Ben Aris in Berlin and Duncan Campbell in Washington
Saturday September 25, 2004
The Guardian

George Bush's grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany.

The Guardian has obtained confirmation from newly discovered files in the US National Archives that a firm of which Prescott Bush was a director was involved with the financial architects of Nazism.

His business dealings, which continued until his company's assets were seized in 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act, has led more than 60 years later to a civil action for damages being brought in Germany against the Bush family by two former slave labourers at Auschwitz and to a hum of pre-election controversy....

I wonder why this isn't big news, that GW's creepy grandfather was a nazi supporter. I had noticed an article from a while back from the New Hampshire Gazette which seemed to have some very fascinating information. Now if you try to click on it, you'll get this message:

Not Found
The requested URL /cgi-bin/NHGstore.cgi was not found on this server.

Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.

But I did find another article people might find of interest. If you want to see what Prescott Bush looked like, you can hit this link. But you're forewarned that he's got that ugly **** Cheney thing going. I wonder why John Buchanan's websites are gone. But you can click on the professor's link to see a lot of the stuff. Here's hoping that the internet can stay free. If the truth is out there, yet it then gets nuked, scrubbed, whatever, ugh.

{On Edit: I'm not sure why some of the links don't work, but here is a working link to the Buchanan article.}

Bush/Nazi Link Confirmed

from The New Hampshire Gazette
Vol. 248, No. 1, October 10, 2003

Guerrilla News Network

Bush and the Nazis: New Documents
Herbert Parmet, November 26, 2003

Editor's Note: For the past couple of months, we've been corresponding with a Florida-based freelance journalist named John Buchanan. In October, Buchanan began publishing a series of articles documenting the Bush dynasty patriarch's business deals with Nazi-era businesses. This summer, Buchanan discovered newly declassified documents in the National Archives that he claims shows Prescott Bush (seen in photo), the president's grandfather, was more connected to Nazi Germany than had previously been known. He broke the story in the New Hamsphire Gazette, a small, fiercely independent newspaper founded by the current publisher's ancestor in 1756. But when Buchanan began to reach out to mainstream news organizations, his story was ignored. The Associated Press ran an article, but it largely discounted the new findings' significance. Buchanan went on the offensive, sending belligerent emails to news organizations that refused to investigate (he's something of a loose canon), and has launched a campaign to run for President of the United States on the Republican ticket to publicize his findings (as I said, he's something of a loose canon). Buchanan argues that only through investigating Prescott Bush's connections to the Nazis can we fully understand the Bush family fortune and the true nature of their political legacy. Does the story hold up? Even if it does, can you hold the son to blame for the sins of the father (or grandfather, in this case)? Recently our new friends at George Mason University's History News Network asked noted historian Herbert Parmet to investigate. This is his report:

What Should We Make of the Charge Linking the Bush Family Fortune to Nazism?

John Buchanan is a free-lance journalist with a mission. He intends to alert the media, and all who will listen, about how Prescott Bush, the progenitor of two presidents, was in league with some of Hitler’s “willing helpers.” Minimized or totally dismissed by the public, the story was revived from its World War II roots by Webster Tarpley and Anton Chaitkin in their "George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography" (1992) and given a strong additional push in John Loftus’s sensationalist "The War Against the Jews" (1994).

Allegations involving the “father” of what has become the Bush dynasty relate to his association with Brown Harriman and Company, the Wall Street investment banking firm, which evolved from a 1931 merger of W. A. Harriman and Company and Brown Brothers, which was brought together by George Herbert Walker, president of the former, and his son-in-law, Prescott.

The younger Bush, by then, was one of the seven directors of Brown Brothers Harriman, a board that included W. Averell Harriman and his brother Roland.

{me- notice how the New Hampshire Gazette links no longer work} :roll:

Buchanan’s charges of a Bush-Nazi past are hard to ignore, largely because of his passion as a true-believer and an effective series of articles in a highly independent New England publication. His enthusiasm for getting “at the truth” of all this has been further emboldened by Loftus, who has suggestedthat Prescott Bush “should have been tried for treason, because they continued to support Hitler after the U.S. entered the war. Loftus, who describes himself as “a former prosecutor with the U.S. Justice Department’s Nazi-hunting unit,” has added the reassurance that he “could have made the case.”

Treasury and Justice department files, including what was then the Office of Alien Property, declassified as recently as September, do indeed show that the U. S. government acted to seize numerous assets held by Harriman affiliated companies. “After the war,” Buchanan has written, “a total of 18 additional Brown Brothers Harriman and UBC-related [Union Banking Corporation] client assets were seized” under the Trading With the Enemy Act, which Franklin D. Roosevelt signed right after Pearl Harbor.

George Herbert (Bert) Walker’s relationship with Averell Harriman went back to 1919, reported Buchanan, when both went to Paris to set up “the German branch of their banking and investment operations, which were largely based on critical war resources such as steel and coal.” Other corporate entities, all with ties to similar German interests, were then created by UBC, which had Prescott Bush on its board – most notably, the Hamburg-American Line, the Holland-American Trading Corporation, and the Seamless Steel Corporation. On October 12, 1920, the St. Louis Globe-Democrat headlined “Ex-St. Louisan Forms Giant Ship Merger,” explaining that Bert Walker was the “moving power” behind the “merger of two big financial houses in New York, which will place practically unlimited capital at the disposal of the new American-German shipping combine.” In the summer and fall of 1942, Congress, under the authority of the Trading With the Enemy Act, seized the first group of entities, the UBC, the Holland-American Trading Corporation, and the Hamburg-American Line. Buchanan’s diligence has discovered that the latter “reportedly smuggled Nazi spies into the U.S. before the war and encouraged U.S. ‘Patriots’ to travel to Germany and proselytize for Hitler in the early 1930s.”

{socrates here- this link works}
Much of this is confirmed by the new documentation. The UBC was not a “bank” at all but “in reality a clearing house” for many assets and enterprises held by Fritz Thyssen, a German steel magnate who has written about his role in helping to finance the Third Reich. Located close to Bush’s 59 Wall Street office, it was “founded in 1924 by W. Averell Harriman on behalf of Thyssen and his Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart N. V. of Holland.” The UBC was seized by the United States under Vesting Order 248 on October 20, 1942, and, according to Buchanan, Bush and Harriman later received $1.5 million in compensation. Similar vesting orders leading to the divestiture of “enemy national” assets continued until well after the war. (A total of ten such vesting orders that indicate the firm’s investments are in the files in my possession.) Other holdings, associated with Bush, are more problematical, such as the relationship with the Silesian Holding Corporation and Consolidated Silesian Steel, which was bought from Thyssen in 1931.

In 1943, after press reports that the Polish mining interest was employing forced labor by using prisoners from the Auschwitz concentration camp, we are informed that “Prescott Bush distanced himself from UBC and had even engaged in the collection of funds for the victims of the war in his role as president of the National War Fund.” He had, in fact, taken over as head of the United Service Organizations soon after Pearl Harbor, raising “millions for the National War Fund,” according to Mickey Herskowitz, Prescott’s recent biographer.

The declassified papers confirm questionable transactions in violation of the Trading With the Enemies Act, but, as with all examinations of corporate malfeasance, more is needed to establish individual responsibility. Buchanan himself, when pressed for more details about Auschwitz, was uncharacteristically hesitant. Consolidated Silesian was the only direct link to the notorious death camp. A file in the Library of Congress confirms the business part of the relationship, but does not give any financial details. “More secretive,” says Buchanan, “is where the cloaking arrangement with Sullivan and Cromwell [most often associated with its best-known partner, John Foster Dulles] and Schroeder Rock, which is the Schroeder Bank and the Rockefeller family trust and investment arrangement – that links to the Rockefeller dealings (which John Loftus has written about) to the New York banks, some of which had to do with I. G. Farben through City National Bank of New York in back of those transactions.” Buchanan contends that there are also records involving the City National Bank, which he cites as “definitely the hot-blood area for all the Nazi money, especially I. G. Farben and Hermann Schmidt, the infamous managing director of I. G. Farben,” which was represented in court by Dulles’s Sullivan and Cromwell.

Their relationship with German enterprises, moreover, began during the years of Germany’s Weimar Republic, well before Hitler's rise. An international investment banking firm, they also did business with the Soviets during the 1920s (which was not in violation of any statute), and, all in all, with forty-five different countries. Their correspondent relationships spanned the world and numbered some five thousand, according to Walter Isaacson and Evan Thomas's The Wise Men, transactions that hardly were confined to Nazis or the Soviet Union.

Still, “following the money trail” is a tricky matter. Loftus points out that the Weimar government, pressed to pay their reparations bill, had to borrow gold from Sullivan and Cromwell’s American clients, and that some 70 percent of the gold that “flowed into Germany during the 1930's” came from U. S. Investors, and heavily from clients of the Dulles firm. An internal government memo on August 18, 1941, also noted that the UBC had made ”extensive” purchases of gold amounting to over eight million dollars, most of which was then shipped to Europe, presumably Germany. That transaction, speculated J. W. Pehle, an assistant to the secretary of the treasury, may have been the basis for rumors that Fritz Thyssen “has large gold deposits hoarded in the United States.” His own examination of the UBC books and ledgers, however, showed that “all of the purchases have been satisfactorily accounted for.”

In view of all the financial transactions involving Germany during this period, the role of that major Jewish banking family, the Warburgs (which also did business with the Harriman group), demonstrates some of the realities of the flow of capital. The Warburgs, backed by such American groups as B’nai B’rith and the American Jewish Committee, demanded in 1934, according to Tarpley and Chaitkin, that “American Jews not ‘agitate’ against the Hitler government” or participate in any pro-Nazi boycott. Such denial about Nazi objectives was not unusual at the time. Aryan laws, at that point in German history, were still less tangible than the marketplace.

Understandably, the American media has indeed been skittish about the Bush-Nazi story. The association of the Tarpley-Chaitkin book with the organization headed by the Lyndon LaRouche organization (published by the Executive Intelligence Review of Washington, a LaRouchian press) has not been helpful, to say the least. Nor has the sensationalist tone and dubious message of Loftus’s "The War Against the Jews." One prominent critic of the administration in Washington, journalist Joe Conason, while acknowledging that the “involvement of Prescott Sr. and other members of the American business aristocracy with Nazi-era industry was shameful,” protests that “neither his offenses, nor the Republican Party’s politics of personal destruction, can justify using such [smear] tactics. Imputing Nazi sympathies to the President or his family ought to beneath his adversaries.” After a story on the allegations appeared in the Polish edition of Newsweek, it was “spiked” by the news magazine’s American version. Major U.S. outlets, Buchanan contends, have also bypassed a chance to investigate the story “when information regarding discovery of the documents was presented to them.” Although carried by the Associated Press, few members picked it up. One that did, Newsday on New York’s Long Island, ran it under the headline “Bush Ancestor’s Bank Seized by Gov’t.”

A notable exception to the skepticism about Buchanan has been the New Hampshire Gazette. Published as a fortnightly in Portsmouth with a circulation of some seven thousand and owned and edited by journalist Steven Fowle, a descendant of the Daniel Fowle who first brought it out in 1756 (making it, “the nation’s oldest newspaper”), it has, to date, run two Buchanan stories plus his interview with John Loftus. Fowle, called by a writer for the St. Petersburg Times, an example of “Yankee Spunk,” explained that he thought it vital to gauge to what extent the Bush family fortune was derived from the Nazis. “If it’s true, it ought to be said,” he emphasized, “and it’s not my fault that it’s ugly.” Asked to account for the skittishness of most of the media, he responded by doubting that the president’s staff would care much about revelations in his paper and added that most of the other media outlets “don’t have the courage to stick their necks out if it involves challenging power. The only trouble with that is that challenging power is their job.”

Conason, of course, is right. But, at least to some extent, it did happen, even if the details are far from clear. As with all such examples of infatuation with power, or the control of power, or the interests of sheer survival, the story should be told. As John F. Kennedy once said, “let the chips fall where they may.”

The most judicious and succinct appraisal of all this was offered by Christopher Simpson ten years ago in n a book called "The Splendid Blond Beast: Money, Law and Genocide in the Twentieth Century:"

By 1944 and 1945, leaders of major German companies such as automaker Daimler Benz, electrical manufacturers AEG and Siemans, and most of Germany’s large mining, steelmaking, chemical, and construction companies found themselves deeply compromised by their exploitation of concentration camp labor, theft, and in some cases complicity in mass murder. They committed those crimes not so much out of ideological conviction, but more often as a means of preserving their influence within Germany’s economy and society. For much of the German economic elite, their cooperation in atrocities was offered to Hitler’s government in exchange for its aid in maintaining their status.

All this, especially considering the number of American businesses that were engaged in the German market, says more about finance and capitalism than about ideology. It is a story of power, totalitarianism on one hand, and sheer greed and economic survival on the other – and with no relationship to “morality.” We need to do more than merely sift through the essence of Buchanan's assertions, as troubling as they may be, to appreciate the value of his labors, and wonder at the contribution to public knowledge of Steven Fowle’s maverick newspaper.

What all this means for the reputation of Prescott Bush's descendants should be as relevant as Joseph P. Kennedy’s for his descendants, just as it was for the connection of the Dulleses with Sullivan and Cromwell. Similar associations did not keep John Foster Dulles from becoming secretary of state or his brother Allen from heading the C.I.A. Nor did it stop Averell Harriman from becoming governor of New York.

Herbert Parmet is Distinguished Professor Emeritus of History at the City University of New York and the author of "George Bush: The Life of a Lone Star Yankee" (1997) and "Eisenhower and the American Crusades" (1972).

This article is published with permission from the History News Network at George Mason University. History News Network was created in June 2001 and features articles by historians about current events. HNN is the only website on the Internet wholly devoted to this task, and features articles by historians on both the left and the right.

Oh my. What do we have here?


The Whitehouse Coup
BBC Radio 4 Document
Monday 23 July 2007

The White House behind security bars

Document uncovers details of a planned coup in the USA in 1933 by a group of right-wing American businessmen

The coup was aimed at toppling President Franklin D Roosevelt with the help of half-a-million war veterans. The plotters, who were alleged to involve some of the most famous families in America, (owners of Heinz, Birds Eye, Goodtea, Maxwell Hse & George Bush’s Grandfather, Prescott) believed that their country should adopt the policies of Hitler and Mussolini to beat the great depression.

Mike Thomson investigates why so little is known about this biggest ever peacetime threat to American democracy.
Last edited by socrates on Thu Jul 26, 2007 10:46 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

The Kennedy Assassinations

Unread postby socrates » Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:27 pm

The Guardian/BBC

Did the CIA kill Bobby Kennedy?

In 1968, Robert Kennedy seemed likely to follow his brother, John, into the White House. Then, on June 6, he was assassinated - apparently by a lone gunman. But Shane O'Sullivan says he has evidence implicating three CIA agents in the murder

Monday November 20, 2006
The Guardian

At first, it seems an open-and-shut case. On June 5 1968, Robert Kennedy wins the California Democratic primary and is set to challenge Richard Nixon for the White House. After midnight, he finishes his victory speech at the Ambassador hotel in Los Angeles and is shaking hands with kitchen staff in a crowded pantry when 24-year-old Palestinian Sirhan Sirhan steps down from a tray-stacker with a "sick, villainous smile" on his face and starts firing at Kennedy with an eight-shot revolver.

As Kennedy lies dying on the pantry floor, Sirhan is arrested as the lone assassin. He carries the motive in his shirt-pocket (a clipping about Kennedy's plans to sell bombers to Israel) and notebooks at his house seem to incriminate him. But the autopsy report suggests Sirhan could not have fired the shots that killed Kennedy. Witnesses place Sirhan's gun several feet in front of Kennedy, but the fatal bullet is fired from one inch behind. And more bullet-holes are found in the pantry than Sirhan's gun can hold, suggesting a second gunman is involved. Sirhan's notebooks show a bizarre series of "automatic writing" - "RFK must die RFK must be killed - Robert F Kennedy must be assassinated before 5 June 68" - and even under hypnosis, he has never been able to remember shooting Kennedy. He recalls "being led into a dark place by a girl who wanted coffee", then being choked by an angry mob. Defence psychiatrists conclude he was in a trance at the time of the shooting and leading psychiatrists suggest he may have be a hypnotically programmed assassin.

Three years ago, I started writing a screenplay about the assassination of Robert Kennedy, caught up in a strange tale of second guns and "Manchurian candidates" (as the movie termed brainwashed assassins). As I researched the case, I uncovered new video and photographic evidence suggesting that three senior CIA operatives were behind the killing. I did not buy the official ending that Sirhan acted alone, and started dipping into the nether-world of "assassination research", crossing paths with David Sanchez Morales, a fearsome Yaqui Indian.

Morales was a legendary figure in CIA covert operations. According to close associate Tom Clines, if you saw Morales walking down the street in a Latin American capital, you knew a coup was about to happen. When the subject of the Kennedys came up in a late-night session with friends in 1973, Morales launched into a tirade that finished: "I was in Dallas when we got the son of a ***** and I was in Los Angeles when we got the little *******." From this line grew my odyssey into the spook world of the 60s and the secrets behind the death of Bobby Kennedy.

Working from a Cuban photograph of Morales from 1959, I viewed news coverage of the assassination to see if I could spot the man the Cubans called El Gordo - The Fat One. Fifteen minutes in, there he was, standing at the back of the ballroom, in the moments between the end of Kennedy's speech and the shooting. Thirty minutes later, there he was again, casually floating around the darkened ballroom while an associate with a pencil moustache took notes.

The source of early research on Morales was Bradley Ayers, a retired US army captain who had been seconded to JM-Wave, the CIA's Miami base in 1963, to work closely with chief of operations Morales on training Cuban exiles to run sabotage raids on Castro. I tracked Ayers down to a small town in Wisconsin and emailed him stills of Morales and another guy I found suspicious - a man who is pictured entering the ballroom from the direction of the pantry moments after the shooting, clutching a small container to his body, and being waved towards an exit by a Latin associate.

Ayers' response was instant. He was 95% sure that the first figure was Morales and equally sure that the other man was Gordon Campbell, who worked alongside Morales at JM-Wave in 1963 and was Ayers' case officer shortly before the JFK assassination.

I put my script aside and flew to the US to interview key witnesses for a documentary on the unfolding story. In person, Ayers positively identified Morales and Campbell and introduced me to David Rabern, a freelance operative who was part of the Bay of Pigs invasion force in 1961 and was at the Ambassador hotel that night. He did not know Morales and Campbell by name but saw them talking to each other out in the lobby before the shooting and assumed they were Kennedy's security people. He also saw Campbell around police stations three or four times in the year before Robert Kennedy was shot.

This was odd. The CIA had no domestic jurisdiction and Morales was stationed in Laos in 1968. With no secret service protection for presidential candidates in those days, Kennedy was guarded by unarmed Olympic decathlete champion Rafer Johnson and football tackler Rosey Grier - no match for an expert assassination team.

Trawling through microfilm of the police investigation, I found further photographs of Campbell with a third figure, standing centre-stage in the Ambassador hotel hours before the shooting. He looked Greek, and I suspected he might be George Joannides, chief of psychological warfare operations at JM-Wave. Joannides was called out of retirement in 1978 to act as the CIA liaison to the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) investigating the death of John F Kennedy.

Ed Lopez, now a respected lawyer at Cornell University, came into close contact with Joann-des when he was a young law student working for the committee. We visit him and show him the photograph and he is 99% sure it is Joannides. When I tell him where it was taken, he is not surprised: "If these guys decided you were bad, they acted on it.

We move to Washington to meet Wayne Smith, a state department official for 25 years who knew Morales well at the US embassy in Havana in 1959-60. When we show him the video in the ballroom, his response is instant: "That's him, that's Morales." He remembers Morales at a cocktail party in Buenos Aires in 1975, saying Kennedy got what was coming to him. Is there a benign explanation for his presence? For Kennedy's security, maybe? Smith laughs. Morales is the last person you would want to protect Bobby Kennedy, he says. He hated the Kennedys, blaming their lack of air support for the failed Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961.

We meet Clines in a hotel room near CIA headquarters. He does not want to go on camera and brings a friend, which is a little unnerving. Clines remembers "Dave" fondly. The guy in the video looks like Morales but it is not him, he says: "This guy is fatter and Morales walked with more of a slouch and his tie down." To me, the guy in the video does walk with a slouch and his tie is down.

Clines says he knew Joannides and Campbell and it is not them either, but he fondly remembers Ayers bringing snakes into JM-Wave to scare the secretaries and seems disturbed at Smith's identification of Morales. He does not discourage our investigation and suggests others who might be able to help. A seasoned journalist cautions that he would expect Clines "to blow smoke", and yet it seems his honest opinion.

As we leave Los Angeles, I tell the immigration officer that I am doing a story on Bobby Kennedy. She has seen the advertisements for the new Emilio Estevez movie about the assassination, Bobby. "Who do you think did it? I think it was the Mob," she says before I can answer.

"I definitely think it was more than one man," I say, discreetly.

Morales died of a heart attack in 1978, weeks before he was to be called before the HSCA. Joannides died in 1990. Campbell may still be out there somewhere, in his early 80s. Given the positive identifications we have gathered on these three, the CIA and the Los Angeles Police Department need to explain what they were doing there. Lopez believes the CIA should call in and interview everybody who knew them, disclose whether they were on a CIA operation and, if not, why they were there that night.

Today would have been Robert Kennedy's 81st birthday. The world is crying out for a compassionate leader like him. If dark forces were behind his elimination, it needs to be investigated

· Shane O'Sullivan's investigation will be shown tonight on Newsnight, BBC2, 10.30pm.

For those who might not know, Sirhan Sirhan was the model for Robert De Niro's character, Travis Bickle, in the originally rated X movie Taxi Driver. Then ironically, you had John Hinkley who was in love with Jodie Foster, supposedly watched the movie and decided to shoot at Ronald Reagan. So you have these separate things- the RFK assassination, a movie, and then the Hinckley/Reagan event tied in together.

I had posted the following at Gastro at the beginning of this year. It now appears that this link is no longer working. Hmmm yet again.

Re: Jim Garrison: A Real Superhero
I didn't want to start a new thread, but I came across this link the other day and thought it might be nice to have at Gastro as part of the public record.

The Impious Digest: So underground, it's hell's bathroom reading

"They do not tell you that Lee Harvey Oswald’s fingerprints were not found on the gun which was supposed to have killed the President. And they do not tell you that nitrate tests exonerated Lee Oswald from the actual shooting by showing that he had not fired a rifle that day. And they do not tell you that it was virtually impossible for Oswald to have taken his fingerprints off the gun, hidden the gun, and gone down four flights of stairs by the time he was seen on the second floor."

"In the absence of further and much more conclusive evidence to the contrary, however, we must assume that the plotters were acting on their own rather than on CIA orders when they killed the President. As far as we have been able to determine, they were not in the pay of the CIA at the time of the assassination --- and this is one of the reasons the President was murdered."

"They are telling you that black is white when they tell you there is no evidence of a conspiracy. They have to know well the significance of the continued concealment of X-rays and autopsy pictures which if revealed to you would show that the President was hit by rifle fire from more than one direction. "

"The people of this country don’t have to be protected from the truth. This country was not built on the idea that a handful of nobles, whether located in our Federal agencies in Washington D.C., or in the news agencies in New York should decide what was good for the people to know, and what they should not know. This is a totalitarian concept which presumes that the leaders of our Federal government and the men in control of the powerful press media constitute a special elite which by virtue of their nobility and their brilliance, empower them to think for the people."

The Magic Bullet- written by the blogger
"Arlen Specter, The Worshipful Master of the Laws of Physics. This is his Magic Bullet, which can disregard the laws of physics. Isn't that neat? Supposedly, it struck two men, and exited intact...."

Excerpt: The Garrison Rebuttal to NBC

On July 15, 1967, Garrison was granted thirty minutes of national television time to respond to an NBC documentary which was highly critical of his investigation. Here is his complete address to the nation in which he outlined his allegations:


The following time period has been made available to District Attorney Jim Garrison of New Orleans to reply to an NBC news program broadcast on June 19. [1967] In that program NBC News examined some of the methods used by Mr. Garrison in his investigation of what he charges was a conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy. Except for the opening and closing announcements, this program has been prepared under Mr. Garrison’s sole supervision. Mr. Garrison.


Tonight I am going to talk to you about truths and about fairy tales; about justice and about injustice.

In the months to follow you are going to learn that many of the things which some of the major news agencies have been telling you are untrue.

You are going to learn that although you are citizens of the United States, information concerning the cause of the death of your President has been withheld from you.

In the months to come you will learn to your own satisfaction that President Kennedy was not killed by a lone assassin. You will learn that there has been and continues to be a concerted effort to keep you from learning these facts. And you will learn, I assure you, that what I have been trying to tell you and what I am telling you tonight is true.

As children we become accustomed to hearing fairy tales. They are always pleasant stories and they are comforting to hear because good always triumphs over evil. At least this is the way it is in fairy tales.

Fairy tales are not dangerous for our children and are probably even good for them up to a point. However, in the real world in which you and I must live, fairy tales are dangerous. They are dangerous because they are untrue. Anything which is untrue is dangerous.

And it is all the more dangerous when a fairy tale becomes accepted as reality simply because it has an official seal of approval, or because honorable men announce that you must believe it or because powerful elements of the press tell you that the fairy tale is true.

The conclusion of the Warren Report, that President Kennedy was killed by a lone assassin, is a fairy tale. This does not mean that the men on the Warren Commission were aware at the time, that their conclusion was totally untrue, nor does it mean necessarily that these men had any sinister motives. It does mean that the conclusion that no conspiracy existed, and that Lee Oswald was the lone assassin is a fiction, and a myth, and that it should be brought to an end.

The people of this country don’t have to be protected from the truth. This country was not built on the idea that a handful of nobles, whether located in our Federal agencies in Washington D.C., or in the news agencies in New York should decide what was good for the people to know, and what they should not know. This is a totalitarian concept which presumes that the leaders of our Federal government and the men in control of the powerful press media constitute a special elite which by virtue of their nobility and their brilliance, empower them to think for the people. Personally, I would rather put my confidence in the common sense of the people of this country.

The truth about the assassination of the President has been concealed from you long enough. Those forces which are fighting so hard today to tell you that they have examined the Warren Report and that everything is fine, and that our investigation has uncovered nothing, are not merely going to lose this fight—they have already lost it.

Now let me tell you why President Kennedy was murdered, and how he was murdered. I also want to give you a few examples, which will show you how the conclusion reached by the Warren Commission is totally impossible.

President Kennedy was assassinated by men who sought to obtain a radical change in our foreign policy—particularly with regard to Cuba. You recall that under President Kennedy the Cold War began to thaw and there were new signs of an effort on the part of the Soviet Union and ourselves to understand each other.

On the map, this [Cuba] appears to be merely a large island off the coast of Florida. But for many men it meant a good deal more than this. In 1963 a great variety of interests existed, which not only desired an American supported invasion of Castro’s Cuba, but took it for granted that it was inevitable.

In the minds of many men, this island represented a tremendous emotional landmark, because they had steered their courses toward it for so long, and with such intensity.

In the fall of 1962 the Cuban Missile Crisis occurred. It was followed by a pronounced new attitude towards Cuba on the part of the United States. Cuba, after this was no longer regarded as an enemy and was no longer regarded as fair game for those men who for one reason or another focused their attention on this island. The new signs of understanding between Russia and the United States continued to develop.

In June of 1963, President Kennedy, addressing students at the American University in Washington told them, “we breathe the same air” as the Russians. He said we should try to live together in peace on this Earth. Well at this point some individuals transferred their hostile attention from Fidel Castro to John F. Kennedy. They planned the President’s assassination, and they planned it well.

The evidence indicates that he [President Kennedy] was shot at from two different directions in the rear and also from the right front.

We know that shooting was coming from two separate directions in the rear because the President and Governor [John] Connally were hit in the back within a split second of each other—and this necessarily had to happen with two bullets coming from two different rifles.

We know that the President was being shot at from the grassy knoll area on the right front because most of the people in Dealey Plaza heard the shots coming from there—and because at least one of the President’s wounds was an entry wound from the front, and because men were seen running from the grassy knoll area immediately afterwards.

That’s why the idea of Lee Harvey Oswald as the lone assassin of the President is a fairy tale and should be brought to an end. If you—the people of the United States—will learn the truth; that the President was assassinated by men who were once connected with the Central Intelligence Agency, of course, this might reflect on the dignity of the CIA.

But I happen to believe that our form of government is strong enough to survive the truth. I believe that you are entitled to the truth about how your President was shot down in the streets and how it was done. Instead, some of the most powerful news agencies we have in our country have worked hard to convince you that everything is all right.

They do not tell you that Lee Harvey Oswald’s fingerprints were not found on the gun which was supposed to have killed the President. And they do not tell you that nitrate tests exonerated Lee Oswald from the actual shooting by showing that he had not fired a rifle that day. And they do not tell you that it was virtually impossible for Oswald to have taken his fingerprints off the gun, hidden the gun, and gone down four flights of stairs by the time he was seen on the second floor.

Above all, they do not tell you of the overwhelming eyewitness testimony that shots were coming from behind the stone wall on the grassy knoll. In a choice between official dignity and the truth, dignity was given priority and so you have not received the full truth.

This is why there continues to be hundreds of documents still hidden from your eyes and classified as secret, and some of them bear such titles as, “Lee Harvey Oswald’s accessibility to information about the U-2”; the Central Intelligence Agency’s dossier on Lee Harvey Oswald, and the CIA file on Jack Ruby. You have not been told that Lee Oswald was in the employ of United States intelligence agencies. But this was the case, and so I am telling you.

Why this young uneducated man had learned to speak Russian even before he left the Marines, and there’s only one way he could have learned that. Oswald had a higher security rating than his buddies in his Marine unit.

During 12 hours of questioning, to give you another example--12 hours of questioning after the assassination—there is no transcript of Oswald’s statements available for you to look at.

I am not even going to bother to dignify the foolishness which Newsweek and NBC and some of the other news agencies have tried to make you believe about my office. I’ve been District Attorney of New Orleans for more than five years and we have never had a single case reversed because of improper methods on the part of our staff. Nor do we rush to judgment on half-baked evidence. And the proof of that is the fact that in more than five years not one defendant has walked out of the courtroom in a murder case with an acquittal. Nor have we lost a major case in five years.

Then what is their game? Their game is to fool you. These people want the investigation stopped. They don’t want a trial at all. Please believe me. They don’t think we’re wrong in our investigation. Obviously, if our investigation was as haywire as they would like to have you think, then you would not see such a coordinated barrage coming from the news centers in the east. Why are they so concerned? Why is it that they cannot wait until the trial comes in order to learn what the facts are? Why are they so anxious to have their own trials?

They know very well that the witnesses they’re presenting to you have not been testifying under oath; that they’re not being cross-examined as they would be at a trial...

Jim Garrison's 1967 Playboy Interview

"I want to make a proposition to the president of NBC: If this charge is true [that two star witnesses against Clay Shaw failed lie detector tests], then I will resign as district attorney of New Orleans..."

Jim Garrison. Although NBC refused to take up Garrison's challenge, they did succeed in undermining the Clay Shaw trial.

PLAYBOY: You expressed your reaction to the NBC show ["The J.F.K. Conspiracy: The Case of Jim Garrison"] in concrete terms on July seventh, when you formally charged Walter Sheridan, the network's special investigator for the broadcast, with attempting to bribe your witness Perry Russo. Do you really have a case against Sheridan, or is this just a form of harassment?

GARRISON: The reason we haven't lost a major case in over five years in office is that we do not charge a man unless we can make it stick in court. And I'm not in the business of harassing anybody. Sheridan was charged because evidence was brought to us indicating that he attempted to bribe Perry Russo by offering him free transportation to California, free lodgings and a job once there, payment of all legal fees in any extradition proceedings and immunity from my office. Mr. Russo has stated that Sheridan asked his help "to wreck the Garrison investigation" and "offered to set me up in California, protect my job and guarantee that Garrison would never get me extradited." According to Russo, Sheridan added that both NBC and the CIA were out to scuttle my case....
Perry Russo

PLAYBOY: How could your probe damage the prestige of the CIA and cause them to take countermeasures against you?

GARRISON: For the simple reason that a number of the men who killed the President were former employees of the CIA involved in its anti-Castro underground activities in and around New Orleans. The CIA knows their identity. So do I --- and our investigation has established this without the shadow of a doubt. Let me stress one thing, however: We have no evidence that any official of the CIA was involved with the conspiracy that led to the President's death.

PLAYBOY: Do you lend no credence, then, to the charges of a former CIA agent, J. Garrett Underhill, that there was a conspiracy within the CIA to assassinate Kennedy?

GARRISON: I've become familiar with the case of Gary Underhill, and I've been able to ascertain that he was not the type of man to make wild or unsubstantiated charges. Underhill was an intelligence agent in World War Two and an expert on military affairs whom the Pentagon considered one of the country's top authorities on limited warfare. He was on good personal terms with the top brass in the Defense Department and the ranking officials in the CIA. He wasn't a full-time CIA agent, but he occasionally performed "special assignments" for the Agency. Several days after the President's assassination, Underhill appeared at the home of friends in New Jersey, apparently badly shaken, and charged that Kennedy was killed by a small group within the CIA. He told friends he believed his own life was in danger. We can't learn any more from Underhill, I'm afraid, because shortly afterward, he was found shot to death in his Washington apartment. The coroner ruled suicide, but he had been shot behind the left ear and the pistol was found under his left side --- and Underhill was right-handed.

PLAYBOY: Do you believe Underhill was murdered to silence him?

GARRISON: I don't believe it and I don't disbelieve it. All I know is that witnesses with vital evidence in this case are certainly bad insurance risks. In the absence of further and much more conclusive evidence to the contrary, however, we must assume that the plotters were acting on their own rather than on CIA orders when they killed the President. As far as we have been able to determine, they were not in the pay of the CIA at the time of the assassination --- and this is one of the reasons the President was murdered: I'll explain later what I mean by that. But the CIA could not face up to the American people and admit that its former employees had conspired to assassinate the President; so from the moment Kennedy's heart stopped beating, the Agency attempted to sweep the whole conspiracy under the rug. The CIA has spared neither time nor the taxpayers' money in its efforts to hide the truth about the assassination from the American people. In this respect, it has become an accessory after the fact in the assassination.

There's much more, if interested, check out the link above.

Here's another Gastro post with yet another link no longer working. This is why maybe we do need to copy and paste what we can, when we can. It just helps if bloggers could at least throw in a sentence or two of their own.

There has been some very disturbing information coming out lately about G.H.W. Bush and his ties to the CIA.

{This below link is also gone. WTF? Maybe it can be found in a cache. It's sickening how much really does get tossed down the memory hole.}

Bush Senior Early CIA Ties Revealed
By Russ Baker and Jonathan Z. Larsen | The Real News Project
January 8, 2007

NEW YORK--Newly released internal CIA documents assert that former president George Herbert Walker Bush's oil company emerged from a 1950's collaboration with a covert CIA officer.

Bush has long denied allegations that he had connections to the intelligence community prior to 1976, when he became Central Intelligence Agency director under President Gerald Ford. At the time, he described his appointment as a 'real shocker.'

But the freshly uncovered memos contend that Bush maintained a close personal and business relationship for decades with a CIA staff employee who, according to those CIA documents, was instrumental in the establishment of Bush's oil venture, Zapata, in the early 1950s, and who would later accompany Bush to Vietnam as a “cleared and witting commercial asset” of the agency.

According to a CIA internal memo dated November 29, 1975, Bush's original oil company, Zapata Petroleum, began in 1953 through joint efforts with Thomas J. Devine, a CIA staffer who had resigned his agency position that same year to go into private business. The '75 memo describes Devine as an “oil wild-catting associate of Mr. Bush.” The memo is attached to an earlier memo written in 1968, which lays out how Devine resumed work for the secret agency under commercial cover beginning in 1963.
{end of excerpt}

Did the Bushes help to kill JFK?

If nothing else, these pages will show the reader the following:

- Although he does not recall when asked, George (Herbert Walker) Bush was in Dallas the day JFK was assassinated.

- Bush lies about the fact that he was a high-ranking CIA official at the time of JFK's death.

- Bush allowed the escape of a convicted terrorist from prison to go to work for him as an undercover CIA asset in Iran-Contra.

- Bush has released another convicted terrorist.

- Both these terrorists were present on Dealey Plaza on 11/22/1963.

- Both these terrorists were convicted for killing 73 people by blowing up an airliner.

- Bush is personal friends with a close associate of these convicted terrorists, who was also a participant in Iran Contra.

- Bush has taken a leading role as CIA official in structuring/organizing these terrorists in effective organizations.

Shall we say: "Only in America, the land of unlimited opportunities"?

George H.W. Bush’s odd Eulogy for Gerald R. Ford

posted by Nabia2004:

Randi Rodes mentioned this on her show today.

Meanwhile, Gerald Ford’s funeral was held today in Washington. Oddly, Papa Bush used the occasion to slap down JFK [assassination] theories. And last week we learned posthumously that Ford opposed the Bush/Cheney oil war in Iraq

Why even mention it?

After a deluded gunman assassinated President Kennedy, our nation turned to Gerald Ford and a select handful of others to make sense of that madness. And the conspiracy theorists can say what they will, but the Warren Commission report will always have the final definitive say on this tragic matter. Why? Because Jerry Ford put his name on it and Jerry Ford’s word was always good.

I have never really researched the JFK [assassination], but this makes me want to more than ever.

If interested in the NY Times article on Ford, please go to that Democratic Underground thread for the link. You need to log in to the NY Times to read it.

Poppy Bush in Dallas the day JFK assassinated

Post #42 by Octafish:

In the hour of the death of President John F. Kennedy, Texas oilman George Herbert Walker Bush named a suspect to the FBI in a "confidential" phone call. He then added he was heading for Dallas. Skeptics need not take my word for it, that's what Poppy told the FBI:


Here's a transcript of the text:


At 1:45 p.m. Mr. GEORGE H. W. BUSH, President of the Zapata Off-Shore Drilling Company, Houston, Texas, residence 5525 Briar, Houston, telephonically furnished the following information to writer by long distance telephone call from Tyler, Texas.

BUSH stated that he wanted to be kept confidential but wanted to furnish hearsay that he recalled hearing in recent weeks, the day and source unknown. He stated that one JAMES PARROTT has been talking of killing the President when he comes to Houston.

BUSH stated that PARROTT is possibly a student at the University of Houston and is active in political matters in this area. He stated that he felt Mrs. FAWLEY, telephone number SU 2-5239, or ARLINE SMITH, telephone number JA 9-9194 of the Harris County Republican Party Headquarters would be able to furnish additional information regarding the identity of PARROTT.

BUSH stated that he was proceeding to Dallas, Texas, would remain in the Sheraton-Dallas Hotel and return to his residence on 11-23-63. His office telephone number is CA 2-0395.
# # #

Gee. Why was Poppy Bush in Dallas when JFK was assassinated?
Could it be, he was on official business?

I suspect he was on Secret Government business. After all, his eldest son bragged during his Texas Air National Guard and Harvard grad school days that his daddy was CIA.

Moreover, why did he wait until AFTER President Kennedy was dead to warn the FBI he knew someone wanted to kill President Kennedy.

Here's an FBI document from the same week of the assassination in which FBI Director J Edgar Hoover briefed one "Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency." Some strange coincidence there, wot?


Here's a transcript of the above:

Date: November 29, 1963
To: Director
Bureau of Intelligence and Research
Department of State
From: John Edgar Hoover, Director
NOVEMBER 22, 1963

Our Miami, Florida, Office on November 23, 1963, advised that the Office of Coordinator of Cuban Affairs in Miami advised that the Department of State feels some misguided anti-Castro group might capitalize on the present situation and undertake an unauthorized raid against Cuba, believing that the assassination of President John F. Kennedy might herald a change in U. S. policy, which is not true.

Our sources and informants familiar with Cuban matters in the Miami area advise that the general feeling in the anti-Castro Cuban community is one of stunned disbelief and, even among those who did not entirely agree with the President's policy concerning Cuba, the feeling is that the President's death represents a great loss not only to the U. S. but to all of Latin America. These sources know of no plans for unauthorized action against Cuba.

An informant who has furnished reliable information in the past and who is close to a small pro-Castro group in Miami has advised that these individuals are afraid that the assassination of the President may result in strong repressive measures being taken against them and, although pro-Castro in their feelings, regret the assassination.

The substance of the foregoing information was orally furnished to Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency and Captain William Edwards of the Defense Intelligence Agency on November 23, 1963, by Mr. W. T. Forsyth of this Bureau.
# # #

George Herbert Walker Bush was head of the CIA when the Church Committee was looking into the CIA assassination programs. He made things all friendly-like and turned what had been a serious hunt for truth under previous DCI William Colby into another dog-and-pony show that was big on show and light on facts.

Regarding Dallas: Now I don't know if Poppy was a trigger man, was only there to watch what happened or what just happened to be there. I do know Poppy Bush has never explained these memos. He's never even admitted where he was the day JFK was killed.


Seeing how he would go on to become President, as would his dim son, I believe it's vitally important that we learn the Truth.

Why? The United States and the world haven't been the same since November 22, 1963. And not a single major player in the nation's mass media have stepped up and demanded a real investigation. So, it's up to us, We the People.

Thanks for understanding what it's all about, Strictly Rockers.
Knowledge is Power.
And, as Firesign Theatre says, Power is Everybody's Business.

I'm curious about hearing that G.H.W. Bush doesn't remember where or what he was doing when JFK was killed. For me, I remember exactly where I was when John Lennon was shot, the space challenger blew up, and of course, when 9/11 happened.

One theory I have heard is that the mafia never had a problem with Castro until he had taken over all corporate interests in Cuba...

George Bush senior doesn't remember where he was? I was talking about this with a friend last night and that person could remember the John Lennon murder, the OJ Simpson car chase, and of course 9/11.

9/11 might seem like an obvious one where we all would remember, but one would think the JFK assassination was as big an event as any of them. To not remember where one was during that time is ludicrous. How many articles have been written through the years about people discussing where they were when JFK got shot?

Finally, here are a few more links I found while scrounging around some of my old posts.

Jim Garrison's closing summation

Notorious CIA operative indicted in Texas for crimes

dpa German Press Agency
Published: Thursday January 11, 2007
excerpt: Washington- A notorious Cuban exile and one-time CIA operative sought by Cuba and Venezuela on terrorism charges was indicted Thursday in Texas on seven charges of naturalization violations, the US Department of Justice said. Luis Posada Carriles, 78, faces up to 40 years in US jail if found guilty on the charges, which include false statements on an application for becoming a naturalized citizen and false statements under oath during a 2006 interview with Department of Homeland Security officials...

Posada Carriles and the Kennedy assassination

By Deirdre Griswold
Published Jun 7, 2005 9:54 PM
The case of Luis Posada Carriles, a known terrorist whom U.S. authorities have refused to extradite to Venezuela, reaches deep into the shadowy world of CIA covert action, especially against the Cuban Revolution.

There is also mounting evidence that Posada Carriles was connected to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, and was in Dallas's Dealey Plaza the day the fatal shots were fired.

Posada Carriles spent nine years in prison in Venezuela for having masterminded the mid-air bombing of a Cuban civilian airliner in 1976, killing all 73 people aboard. The CIA is known to have bribed Venezuelan prison guards to arrange his escape in 1985. That is the year that George H.W. Bush became head of the CIA. One guard, now retired, recently described these CIA efforts on Venezuelan television.

Posada Carriles was also arrested and convicted in Panama in 2000 for entering the country with the intent of killing Cuban President Fidel Castro, who was attending an Ibero-American summit meeting there. But President Mireya Moscoso, in one of her last acts in office, pardoned Posada Carriles and three other convicted terrorists after they had spent just one year in jail.

Moscoso is part of the old political establishment that was returned to power in Panama after the U.S., under the same George H.W. Bush, by then the president, invaded the country in 1989. She spent many years in Miami, where she was close to leaders of the Cuban exile community who have worked with the CIA ever since the Cuban Revolution.

Moscoso's popularity in office plummeted to the lowest of any Panamanian president, and she now faces corruption charges. She gave all 72 Panamanian legislators expensive Cartier watches and jewelry right before a vote on the government's proposed budget. Her secretary admitted to having a freezer stuffed with thousands of dollars in cash. However, this friend of the Miami exile gang says Fidel Castro is behind the corruption charges. (Dictionary of Political Figures)

Even Congress saw a conspiracy

The nexus of Cuban counter-revolutionary exiles, the CIA and organized crime figures in the Kennedy assassination has long been known. Even though the official U.S. government position remains that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone assassin, the majority of people here and around the world don't buy it. And the one investigation of the assassination by Congress--by the House Select Committee on Assassinations--found in its final report that "President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy."

Despite all the evidence showing the involvement of right-wingers, however, especially those who held Kennedy responsible for the failure of the Bay of Pigs invasion, the corporate media continue to deride "conspiracy theorists." They cite the Warren Commission as their authority--a commission that included former CIA Director Allen Dulles, the architect of the 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion.

Many scholars have investigated the role of Operation 40 in the Kennedy assassination. Operation 40 was a special group inside the CIA set up with the authorization of the National Security Council right before the Bay of Pigs. Historian Arthur Schlesinger referred to it in a June 1961 memo to Richard Goodwin: "The ostensible purpose of Operation 40 was to administer liberated territories in Cuba. But the CIA agent in charge, a man known as Felix, trained the members of the group in methods of third degree interrogation, torture and general terrorism."

That man in charge was Felix Rodriguez, who in 1967 led the CIA squad that captured and then murdered Che Guevara in Bolivia. He took Che's Rolex watch and proudly displayed it to reporters afterwards. His Miami home is decorated with photos of himself and George H.W. Bush together.

Cuban view of Posada Carriles

Gen. Fabian Escalante, the former head of Cuban counter-intelligence, is author of "The Secret War: CIA Covert Operations Against Cuba, 1959-62," and "The Plot," both published by Ocean Press. In May of this year, he told interviewer Jean-Guy Allard about Posada Carriles's role in Operation 40 and the Kennedy assassination.

"Who in 1963 had the resources to assassinate Kennedy? Who had the means and who had the motives to kill the U.S. president?” asked Escalante. "CIA agents from Operation 40 who were rabidly anti-Kennedy. And among them were Orlando Bosch, Luis Posada Carriles, Antonio Veciana and Felix Rodriguez Mendigutia."

The testimony of Chauncey Holt, a self-confessed CIA operative and mob associate, backs this up. In a videotaped interview made shortly before he died, Holt identified Posada Carriles as one of the Cuban exiles who was in Dealey Plaza at the time of the Kennedy assassination.

In his interview with Allard, Escalante detailed the many CIA operations in Latin America that involved Cubans from this same group, originally trained by the CIA for the Bay of Pigs invasion. These included the coup against President Salvador Allende's government in Chile and the subsequent murder in Washington of former Chilean ambassador Orlando Letelier, as well as the Contra war against the Sandinistas in Nicaragua.

Bush, Goss and Operation 40

In Escalante's view, it was the members of Operation 40 who had the training and the sharpshooting ability necessary to carry out the assassination of Kennedy. The Cuban counter-intelligence chief identified the North Americans in the group as David Morales, David Phillips, E. Howard Hunt, William Harvey, Frank Sturgis, Gerry Hemming, John Rosselli, "who was second head of the Chicago mafia at that time in '62," and Porter Goss. Goss is now head of the CIA, nominated by George W. Bush, son of the former CIA head.

In “Deadly Secrets,” authors Warren Hinkle and William Turner named Rafael 'Chi Chi' Quintero, Luis Posada Carriles, Felix Rodriguez and Frank Sturgis as members of Operation 40, under the overall control of E. Howard Hunt. Hunt and Sturgis later spent time in prison for the Watergate burglary and are believed to have been in Dallas the day Kennedy was assassinated.

The same cast of characters appears, again and again, committing acts of mayhem, murder and sabotage to keep Latin American countries under the control of U.S. corporate interests. And the same high-up political figures in the United States--with the Bush family at the top of the list--are their sponsors and protectors.

Today, the whole world is watching as the U.S. government, which has used the cry of "terrorism" to launch two bloody wars and to imprison, torture and murder untold numbers of Arab and Muslim people, tries to figure out what to do with Posada Carriles. He's a proven terrorist who has twice been sprung from jail and harbored by the invisible government of this country, the so-called "intelligence community." He is more than an embarrassment for the Bush administration.

One thing is for sure: they will never let him be questioned about his activities in an open forum where he could implicate key members of the U.S. ruling class and their political operatives.

Griswold was executive director of the Citizens' Committee of Inquiry, which carried out an independent investigation of the Kennedy assassination in the 1960s.
Copyright © 1995-2006 Workers World. Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

More on the 1934 Coup Attempt: Harper's Magazine

Unread postby socrates » Mon Jul 30, 2007 12:25 pm

1934: The Plot Against America
BY Scott Horton
PUBLISHED July 28, 2007

I’m back from the land of heather and thistles, not to mention wee drams and lukewarm ale, but on my way out a friend at the BBC alerted me to this, a not-to-miss program on the BBC this morning, accessible over the next several days by internet. It’s the story of the Plot Against America. I don’t mean the Philip Roth novel, nor even the Sinclair Lewis book, It Can’t Happen Here, but rather the historical events upon which these two works of fiction were based.

In November 1934, federal investigators uncovered an amazing plot involving some two dozen senior businessmen, a good many of them Wall Street financiers, to topple the government of the United States and install a fascist dictatorship. Roth’s novel is developed from several strands of this factual account; he assumed the plot is actually carried out, whereas in fact an alert FDR shut it down but stopped short of retaliatory measures against the plotters. A key element of the plot involved a retired prominent general who was to have raised a private army of 500,000 men from unemployed veterans and who blew the whistle when he learned more of what the plot entailed. The plot was heavily funded and well developed and had strong links with fascist forces abroad. A story in the New York Times and several other newspapers reported on it, and a special Congressional committee was created to conduct an investigation. The records of this committee were scrubbed and sealed away in the National Archives, where they have only recently been made available.

The Congressional committee kept the names of many of the participants under wraps and no criminal action was ever brought against them. But a few names have leaked out. And one is Prescott Bush, the grandfather of the incumbent president. Prescott Bush was of course deep into the business of the Hamburg-America Lines, and had tight relations throughout this period with the new Government that had come to power in Germany a year earlier under Chancellor Aldoph Hitler. It appears that Bush was to have formed a key liaison for the group with the new German government.

Prescott Bush, of course, went on to service as a U.S. Senator from Connecticut, and his son, George H.W. Bush emerged from World War II as a hero.

The Plot Against America portrayed in this episode of the BBC series “Document” gives fascinating insight into a dark and little known piece of American history in which the nation stood on the brink of betrayal. The role of the most powerful political dynastic family in the nation’s history in this whole affair is shocking.
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts


Unread postby Don Smith » Mon Jul 30, 2007 1:06 pm

As my knowledge of history changed from the conventional "Land of Liberty" crap, I saw that most "government" is a shadow play, held up to the mob with the conventional slogans of patriotism, religious and social group bonding techniques, and all of the other tribal affinity tags which help one to tell "them" from "us".
The end result of my years of study has been that I am not a "citizen" of any nation now, any nationalist trappings are, more than likely, a veneer for theft and exploitation.
The enormity of the entire social apparatus makes it very difficult to communicate about what the true situation may be, as it is so complex, and is as much design as it is accident, making any simple, or easy definitions almost impossible.
First, one must escape the conventional wisdom, (Marx called them "the chains of illusion"), as most of what one thought to be "reality" may in fact be a stage set, with no more substance than a childs' paper cut-out toy.
One must be prepared to be separated by a common language, as the meaning of words is very different from one person to another, "freedom" can be a very tricky idea to share , for instance.
A most dangerous result of new insights may be a sense of despair, as the loss of an entire lifetime of belief can be a shattering experience. Most of the people that share my true feelings are of the opinion that nothing can be done given the lock upon popular imagination which dominates the present social organization of humanity.
In this event, the psychopaths win.
So, whatever my "rational" mind may have concluded about the likelihood of real change, I act as though it is possible to be human, caring, and that all life is my kin, part of the "spark" of the Almighty.
The other choice is darkness, and that will come soon enough, why rush it?
Last edited by Don Smith on Sun Aug 05, 2007 11:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Don Smith

Site of interest

Unread postby Don Smith » Tue Jul 31, 2007 11:33 am


This site is one of the few that does not reek of paranoia, social manipulation or any of the multitude of psyops gimmicks with which confusion is spread.
It has extensive studies of many issues and a solid base of reference.

{on edit: I think that website was created by someone named Dilbert at BreakForNews, a website well-known for spreading disinformation. The guy is heavy into fonts and colours, bolds, italics. He can't seem to let the reader decide. It's like getting a second hand book already chewed up by the former owner. This wasn't the first time "Don Smith" plugged this clown.}
Don Smith

How Could This Be Missed With The Blueprints?

Unread postby socrates » Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:14 pm

In light of the other information from this thread, it may not be so tinfoilish to think a swastiska design was deliberately created for a Navy building complex.

Navy to spend $600,000 to mask 'hateful' swastika-shaped barracks

Oy gevalt.


"The U.S. Navy has decided to spend as much as $600,000 for landscaping and architectural modifications to obscure the fact that one its building complexes looks like a swastika from the air," Tony Perry reports in Monday's edition of the LA Times. "The four L-shaped buildings, constructed in the late 1960s, are part of the amphibious base at Coronado and serve as barracks for Seabees."

The article continues, "But once people began looking at satellite images from Google Earth, they started commenting about on blogs and websites about how much the buildings resembled the symbol used by the Nazis."

The shape of the barracks was first noticed and commented upon at a Google Earth Community bulletin board as early as February 2005. As the oddity became more widely known, however, calls arose for the Navy to do something about it. Now the prevailing tone in blog comments is one of scorn for the waste of $600,000 on something that can only be seen from space.
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Unread postby socrates » Mon Feb 18, 2008 6:20 pm

Ballet for a Patsy
by GJJdude

Also courtesy of this youtube poster:

The Jim Garrison Story - Part 1

The Jim Garrison Story - Part 2

The Jim Garrison Story - Part 3

The Jim Garrison Story - Part 4
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Unread postby socrates » Mon Jul 07, 2008 2:20 pm

BBC Radio 4: The Whitehouse Coup (1 of 3)

BBC Radio 4: The Whitehouse Coup (2 of 3)

BBC Radio 4: The Whitehouse Coup (3 of 3)
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Time To Get Out The Tinfoil

Unread postby socrates » Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:34 am

I've seen a lot of predictable chatter lately at Democratic Underground concerning the JFK Assassination. The debunkers certainly seem to be getting paid to post. They systematically debunk as if they are selling the big lie. Where is the dialogue? How come the best evidence is ignored? Tons of witnesses saw an exit wound towards the back of Kennedy's head. That means the shot that blew his head apart came from in front of him. What about all those witnesses who noticed suspicious activity in the grassy knoll area? How the heck was Oswald allowed to be assassinated within a police station? When someone denies a crime the way he did, I take notice. He said he was a patsy.

The Dorothy Kilgallen angle is an interesting one. The debunkers always have an answer, however. Oh, she was a lush. She overdosed on alcohol and pills, yadda, yadda, yadda.

Here's a thought provoking article out of Midwest Today:


Born in Chicago, she became a New York journalist and popular game show panelist.
But her mysterious death still troubles a legion of fans who won't forget this remarkable woman

During her 35-year career as a gossip columnist, crime reporter and panelist on the weekly TV game show, "What's My Line?," Dorothy Kilgallen ("Dolly Mae" to her friends), was a fearless journalist who broke major stories, and was the only reporter to interview Lee Harvey Oswald's killer, Jack Ruby. Her biggest case yet -- investigating President John F. Kennedy's assassination, and finding fault with the official story -- became the last one she ever pursued. She died mysteriously in November 1965, after being threatened, but the cops never probed further. Thanks to reruns on the Game Show Network, fans are still talking about Dorothy, including Larry King of CNN, and Dominick Dunne, who wrote about her in Vanity Fair. Now, shocking new information has emerged....
Nobody - I mean nobody - pulls the wool over the eyes of a Gambini
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Time To Get Out The Tinfoil

Unread postby socrates » Sun Apr 11, 2010 2:00 pm

I'm just making my rare appearance here to let Free Forums know this place is still ticking, albeit on life support. :? I've been doing my blogging over at dave from queens 2 dot blogspot. Im curious about the Wikileaks story. I sense paid fakes are all over the internet trying to turn obvious war crimes into being an enigma. We do have solid proof that military intelligence (and FBI) are all over the net. I think I've noticed an Air Force member over at DU posting military endorsed astroturf. That will probably be included in my next DFQ2 entry. There is an Air Force blogging unit. That's not tinfoil.
Nobody - I mean nobody - pulls the wool over the eyes of a Gambini
User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Return to Current Events

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests