Posts: 1,597
Threads: 81
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Oct 2012
Thanks Peter... I will go read more of Tony's blog....
I think if very telling the line about Bundy not even getting a slap on the wrist (even after the reports later put the blame squarely on him) while the very agency who supposedly pulled the strings has 3 of its top officers removed....
I can't imagine the ousting of Dulles was part of HIS plan....
When the guard dogs stop listening... or even growl at the hand that feeds...
well you get my drift.
Once in a while you get shown the light
in the strangest of places if you look at it right..... R. Hunter
Posts: 16,099
Threads: 1,767
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2008
David Josephs Wrote:Thanks Peter... I will go read more of Tony's blog....
I think if very telling the line about Bundy not even getting a slap on the wrist (even after the reports later put the blame squarely on him) while the very agency who supposedly pulled the strings has 3 of its top officers removed....
I can't imagine the ousting of Dulles was part of HIS plan....
When the guard dogs stop listening... or even growl at the hand that feeds...
well you get my drift.
Bundy's brother was openly in the CIA, and I think it very likely they both were. There were other snakes in JFK's liar.
To answer the original statement: I think there are times when the CIA directs/requests help from the Military; other times when the Military asks CIA to carry out something for them; yet other times when they work hand-in-hand - and of course they both sometimes hire others, who are deniable, to carry out their deeds. While I'm sure there is some turf wars, I think generally they get along fine and share the same lack of morality and bellicose and imperialistic pro-corporate views. The military is obviously larger, but the special ops branches hardly differ from the CIA special ops groups. Both have non-aggressive intelligence arms and both have license to kill. Both are prohibited from operating in the USA and both do. They are two sides to the same coin and answer to the same masters, IMHO....and that is often NOT the President....nor Congress!
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Posts: 5,374
Threads: 149
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2010
David Josephs Wrote:Hi Albert... no one is saying the CIA were not the main Facilitators, with a capital "F". But to say they SPONSORED it is to not understand the model.
To believe that Dulles and the CIA (and JFK for that matter) were not part of something much larger is to ignore history..
DJ
Right. Works for me.
To me a proper analogy would be electrical plasma arcking from the Sponsors to Dulles, Phillips, Angleton, and Harvey. That way at the critical times there would be no separation of power and function between those two groups. So it takes some really 3D thinking to understand how that dynamic worked. That way the whole function of CIA would be to extend the power and will of those Sponsors you detailed into government in a way that skipped democratic regulation. An analogy would be that the electrical transformer substation of government failed to have the right equipment to prevent this electrical arcking short-circuit of power. JFK got zapped in Dealey Plaza. As Donald Sutherland would say in Kelly's Heroes​, "Like electrocuted, daddy-O"...
