A Simple Question as We Prepare for the 50th - Printable Version +- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora) +-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-1.html) +--- Forum: JFK Assassination (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-3.html) +--- Thread: A Simple Question as We Prepare for the 50th (/thread-10219.html) |
A Simple Question as We Prepare for the 50th - Jim Hackett II - 24-01-2013 The issue of killing Custer in a political context would fit the pattern of the Empire "robber-barons". I do not know enough about the machinations of the Elite in this circumstance. The concept most definitely is borne out by events. Timing can be so revealing in covert ops. Circumstantial Evidence but none the less evidence in the timing of some events. Akin to JFK openly (in his cabinet and beyond - NSAM 263 signed by JFK not signed in his name) defining his SE Asia game refusal and within weeks he dies, timing. Or Someone buying WTC and within weeks making a killing on murder by state, timing. Hyperbolas? Maybe. Timing. End result? An area I will check out. A good thing. Thank You Charles A Simple Question as We Prepare for the 50th - David Josephs - 24-01-2013 Jim Hackett II Wrote:David Josephs Wrote:Not paperclip. LOL.Jim Hackett II Wrote:First I am convinced I MUST get Mr. Evica's book mentioned. I don't have it. I did not post a comment to argue with anyone Jim... why you need be pre-emptively confrontational, IDK. :nono: Jim, if FASCISM exited long before Europe and back to 2000BC... and the Dulles', Morgan's and Rockefeller's were direct pawns of European Money using FASCIST techniques to control commerce and politics... What exactly is AMERICAN HOME GROWN about any of it? Sounds to me the concept and the people using it are anything BUT home grown... but carefully planted, fertilized and cultivated by the same "Wall Street and Elite" (CFR) who first exercised it when they got here from OTHER places. Jazz and Football are "American Home Grown" Greed, hatred, fascism, and control existed WELL BEFORE the USA was even discovered.... yet as you say... we are not here to argue... and I only asked for YOUR understanding of Fascism and its manifestation in the US. That the issues are bigger than my question is no big news Jim. If discussing your POV and explaining yourself to someone who doesn't necessarily AGREE with you constitutes "meaningless confrontational BS", so you don't have to put your beliefs and opinions to any test.... so be it. I wont be bothering with you or your opinions any longer. Take care DJ A Simple Question as We Prepare for the 50th - Greg Burnham - 24-01-2013 Easy boys... I've known Jim for nearly 15 years. Good man. David, you know how much I respect you. Perhaps all roads lead to Rome? A Simple Question as We Prepare for the 50th - David Josephs - 24-01-2013 Greg Burnham Wrote:Easy boys... I have no beef with Jim... never did... For him to go in that direction in reply was simply offputting.... I have my beliefs, he has his. Discussing them and even disagreeing with each other still does not call for that tone with me. Should we call the confrontation between Cain and Able a form of Fascism? How far back do we go..... When one does a wiki search we find a number of definitions and interpretations: Is it so invasive and argumentative to ask for a clarification of terms so a discussion can be had with a common basis? DJ Emilio Gentile describes fascism within ten constituent elements:[SUP][27][/SUP]
[/SUP] One common definition of fascism focuses on three groups of ideas:
A Simple Question as We Prepare for the 50th - Charles Drago - 25-01-2013 Jim Hackett II Wrote:The issue of killing Custer in a political context would fit the pattern of the Empire "robber-barons". You're very welcome. I direct your attention to the DPF thread Custer at Little Bighorn: A Deep Political Hypothesis. It is located at https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?4677-Custer-at-Little-Bighorn-A-Deep-Political-Hypothesis&highlight=Custer My minimally edited opening post there from 2010: The Battle of the Little Bighorn (a/k/a Custer's Last Stand and the Battle of the Greasy Grass) stands with Gettysburg and the Alamo in the holy trinity of American military engagements fought on the home continent. The events of Sunday, June 25, 1876 leading to the annihilation of Brevet Major General George Armstrong Custer's command nucleus of five troops of the 7th U.S. Cavalry along the banks of a narrow, twisting river in the high plains country of what is now eastern Montana remain the subjects of intense scrutiny by an international cadre of scholars, amateur historians, and "buffs." Literally thousands of books focusing on that engagement and its principal combatants have been published in the intervening 134 years. Yet mysteries and impassioned arguments regarding everything from the development of the battle itself to the motives and even mental states of Custer and at least two of his junior officers are ongoing. For the purposes of this forum, I'll put forward the following hypothesis: Deep political forces within the military/industrial complex of the time conspired to embarrass Custer -- and thus neutralize him as a political force viewed as a serious impediment to the fulfillment of Manifest Destiny -- by sabotaging his actions during the Montana campaign. ITEM -- Custer had incurred the undying enmity of President Ulysses Grant. Earlier in 1876, the House Committee on Military Expenditures had conducted an investigation of various acts of Secretary of War William W. Belknap. Custer was called to testify in the proceedings. He all but confirmed the accusations not only against Belknap, but also against President Grant's brother, Orville Grant. ITEM -- Custer had incurred the undying enmity of mining and railroad interests. In 1875, Custer had made a solemn, spiritual commitment to the Sioux (hereinafter Lakota) that he would not fight Native Americans again. Custer's promise coincided with a U.S. Senate commission meeting with Lakota leaders to purchase access to the gold mining fields in the Black Hills (which Custer had discovered a year earlier). The Lakota eventually turned down the government offer in favor of an 1868 treaty that promised U.S. military protection of their lands. ITEM -- Custer, writing under the nom de plume Nomad in "Turf, Field and Farm," had reached a wide audience with his idealized depictions of "noble savages" and a way of life and wilderness worth preserving. At its core, the conflict between the indigenous peoples of the North American continent and Americans was and remains a spiritual conflict (ask Leonard Peltier). How was the aforementioned "sabotage" carried out? To reduce a long and complex story to its essence: Custer's attack on the huge village encountered at Little Bighorn was doomed to failure due to the actions and non-actions (including the refusal to obey at least one direct order) of the subordinate officers to whom he had entrusted command of combat battalions. Historians continue to try -- in vain -- to explain why Captain Frederick Benteen refused to obey Custer's direct, written order, issued in the heat of battle, to ride to his commander's relief. As Custer's battalion came under fire, and as Major Marcus Reno senselessly ended his all-important charge against the village and retreated in panic across the river to take up a defensive position some five miles distant from Custer's final stand, Benteen casually watered his horses miles from the action and finally came up at a trot. Benteen, an avowed Custer hater, found Reno's whipped troops and, rather than rallying them in a march toward Custer, sat impassively within the sound of Custer's vollying rifle fire (an established signal to indicate position and predicament) and allowed his commander's battalion to be destroyed. I submit that the confusion of historians is the product of the absence of deep political analysis of Little Bighorn. You should not read the absurdly condensed narrative offered above as an argument for George Armstrong Custer's highly developed moral conscience. The Boy General was an opportunist of the highest order. And he was America's first modern public relations creation. (In violation of a direct order, he brought Mark Kellogg, a reporter for the Bismarck Tribune, with him on the final campaign. They died less than a mile apart.) There is much more to tell. My hypothesis is the basis for a motion picture treatment that I've written. The story of Little Bighorn is a bonanza for sub-plots. The best: The only officer at the Reno-Benteen position who attempted to ride to Custer's aid was Captain Thomas Weir -- the man who Custer suspected of having had an affair with Elizabeth Bacon Custer. Weir survived the Custer fight only to die -- allegedly of acute alcoholism -- less than six months later. Shortly before his demise, he wrote to Libby Custer to note that he knew the "real" story of why her husband perished. In any event, I hope this little exercise in deep political thinking helps us along as we pursue more contemporary -- but hardly more relevant -- inquiries. A Simple Question as We Prepare for the 50th - Jim Hackett II - 25-01-2013 https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums...ghlight=Custer I knew a little of this, but not the depth of who was tied to whom. Nor did I know the pending scandal involving GACuster. In high school I was taught Benteen and Reno could NOT relieve Custer except by also being wiped out. I knew that was BS even then. The absence of courts martial was the give away. I would say the hypothesis you advanced is quite reasonable. Fitting both the known evidence and making a valid prediction of the future events, i.e. exploitation of the nations and their resources that followed in the renewal of the "indian wars". The words of the empire. The ST of the 19th Century at work is now my opinion of the LBH, another fable. Jim A Simple Question as We Prepare for the 50th - Jim Hackett II - 25-01-2013 I apologize if I over reacted. I took a quote of myself in reply to be a post directed to me. I would defend any American's or anyone's (for that matter) right to hold any view, just on principle, and the right to express that view. As I said before, my opinion is that there is more to agree upon than to disagree about. Th ... Thh .... That's All Folks. A Simple Question as We Prepare for the 50th - Charles Drago - 25-01-2013 OK, let's get back on an even keel if we can and revisit the topic of this thread. Again, what I'm looking for is a simple declaration of what it would take for us to declare victory. Which is another of asking after the nature of our objectives. A Simple Question as We Prepare for the 50th - Greg Burnham - 25-01-2013 Charles Drago Wrote:OK, let's get back on an even keel if we can and revisit the topic of this thread. In my view: 1) There is no chance that the government (not "We the People" as it should connote) will concede perfidy 2) There is no chance that those who actually "pulled triggers" will be brought to justice 3) There is no chance that those who set the above "trigger pullers" in motion will be brought to justice 4) There is no chance that we will discover what actually did happen, notwithstanding the fact that we already know what did NOT happen 5) There is a very good chance that the American People will continue to fail to accept what the "Events in Dallas" MEAN about their liberty 6) There is no chance that conspiracy in the murder of John Kennedy in Dallas will be widely acknowledged as HISTORICALLY accurate by the "powers that be" -- even though those in power are only there at our pleasure My objective is to inform this--and the next generation--as to the dangers of government run amok. My objective will be met when I have fought the good fight to that end. My objective is that we never forget our dying king. These objectives will be met...not in my lifetime, but perhaps in my grandkids' lifetimes...or their children's children's lifetime. Do not forget JFK. He made a difference for all of us. Do not forget JFK. A Simple Question as We Prepare for the 50th - Phil Dragoo - 25-01-2013 Aldous Huxley's Brave New World held Henry Ford as saviour, "ending is better than mending," "a gram is better than a damn," test tube children and that "hug me, Honey, drug me" drove the savage to the noose. Too much effort in describing ad hoc measures gives them a solidness not their own. The only constant is the imperative for power; whether that comes from feigned communitarianism, monarchy, class warfare, xenophobia, or the unpredictable Stalinesque act of cruelty, it is the end, not the means at the center. Kennedy was inconvenient to the power process, as was Custer. As was Patton. I would consider it a good day when the mass of the nation perceives its place as expendable exploitees of hidden brokers. That the removal of John F. Kennedy Thirty-Fifth President of the United States was an act of the crassest display of power. That the individual heretofore blamed for the crime was ignorant of the bloody denouement. That the duly formed and thoroughly corrupted agencies of the government were willing handmaidens to the crime, serving in any capacity save that of sponsor. That position being reserved for the unseen cabal possessing the power. A constitution and a republic are merely cages and leashes by which honorable men seek to restrain the beast. The beast is not contained by any political definition nor confined to a mortal shell with birth and death. Were the people to turn from America's Got Talent and acknowledge America's Got Dark Overlords, it would be a better day. There are a thousand ways to the same achievement, and Greg notes Rome as the confluence of so many roads. That we are largely European refugees demonstrates at one point we realized the antifreedom forces there. I posit they now use domestic means for the same dark ends. Going over the Banister, Ferrie, Arcacha Smith, Phillips, Hunt shuttling and scuttling, I return to a thesis which occurred to me of late That as Angleton prepared the patsy with files and false defection and Mexico City and Joannides' DRE and Hunt's CRC helped with the FPCC aspect Dulles et Bissell et Cabell had insured the infamous debacle of Bay of Pigs would create a body of murderously hateful Cubans ready to slay the traitor Kennedy and Dallas would be a lovely venue having shown its stuff with Caroline's tricycle, black-bordered posters, mistreating that dangerous macho figure Adlai I would smell victory when the people say this guy was framed; we got cheated into a war wrapped around our bodies with heavy chain, its deadly anchor in the South China Sea (and they whined that Bush got them in two wars over WMDsyet uncritically accept a bad shot with a toy gun shooting magic bullets by remote control from a lunchroom dinette, its drone joystick a cheese sandwich, or a Coke) Frank Zappa would tell his audience, "If your children knew how lame you are, they'd kill you in your beds. I would gladly settle for the death of innocence |