+- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora)
+-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: Lounge (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-19.html)
+--- Thread: Open Question for the Board (/thread-2878.html)
Open Question for the Board - Ed Jewett - 09-01-2010
What or where are the most concise lists, renderings and descriptions of the degree to which the US state security apparati historically have interfered with investigations (Congressional or otherwise) of deep political events? (Some people are still believing in the tooth fairy.)
Open Question for the Board - Magda Hassan - 09-01-2010
It's a long, long list Ed. :captain: How long is a piece of string? From here to infinity!
Most of it is never put on paper.
But if it is paper you need the Warren Commission for a start.
Open Question for the Board - Jan Klimkowski - 09-01-2010
There are also an endless variety of tactics deployed.
For instance: asking the wrong question; restricting the "scope" of any inquiry; stacking the inquiry board full of hired lackeys; depleting the research resources of any genuine truth seeker who makes it through to the inquiry board; smearing, blackmailing or threatening truth seekers on the inquiry board; planting false witnesses or evidence to deliberately mislead; withholding key evidence or witnesses; eliminating key witnesses.
And I've hardly started.
In my own investigations, I've found that the key to getting truth out is often key, insider, evidence provided by a genuine whistleblower. Eg in the documentary film exposing unethical and unscientific clinical trials of new drugs in developing countries, funded by Big Pharma, US AID and private foundations (who all have their own security networks) the key was the courage of a whistleblower who provided the raw data of the outcomes of those enrolled in the trials. This enabled us to demonstrate that the claims made in peer-reviewed medical journal papers about the safety and efficacy of these drugs were not a fair and reasonable interpretation of the actual results of the trials. Without access to the raw data, which was provided by the whistleblower, we would not have been able to challenge those peer-reviewed clinical papers and publish.
For the record, that courageous whistleblower is now dead, quite possibly murdered.