This is the most important thing said so far in this thread:
Conspiracy at this level and on this scale does not involve a secret central planner with occult rituals who executes top-down, command-and-control operations. Instead, Justin Raimondo puts it best when he commented on the penetrating work of Murray Rothbard: "Here there is no single agency, no omnipotent central committee that issues directives, but a multiplicity of interest groups and factions whose goals are generally congruent. In this milieu, there are familial, social, and economic connections, as well as ideological complicity, and none is better than Rothbard at ferreting out and unraveling these biographical details. Taken together, the author's small and studied brushstrokes paint a portrait of a ruling class whose ruthlessness is surpassed only by its brazen disloyalty to the nation."5 Congruent interests is the key phrase rather than conspiracy.
Recognition of this world of powerful "congruent interests" opens up our understanding of the assassination of President Kennedy as well as of 9/11. We have no better suspect for who wielded the glue to bind together congruent interests than the eastern banking establishment's senior partner, the Rockefellers.
Not exactly. I said, IF FORCED TO CHOOSE ONE, on the basis of
available information, I would name David Rockefeller and his
henchmen (Kissinger, Bryzinski, Dulles, et al) and the rest of
the New World Order Crowd. Those were names I named.
Jack
From Defrauding America, Rodney Stich, 3rd edition 1998 p. 638-639]: "The Role of deep-cover CIA officer, Trenton Parker, has been described in earlier pages, and his function in the CIA's counter-intelligence unit, Pegasus. Parker had stated to me earlier that a CIA faction was responsible for the murder of JFK … During an August 21, 1993, conversation, in response to my questions, Parker said that his Pegasus group had tape recordings of plans to assassinate Kennedy. I asked him, "What group were these tapes identifying?" Parker replied: [B]"Rockefeller, Allen Dulles, Johnson of Texas, George Bush, and J. Edgar Hoover."[/B] I asked, "What was the nature of the conversation on these tapes?"
I will buy that if you add in various other Rockefeller stooges.
I don't have the tapes now, because all the tape recordings were turned over to [Congressman] Larry McDonald. But I listened to the tape recordings and there were conversations between Rockefeller, [J. Edgar] Hoover, where [Nelson] Rockefeller asks, "Are we going to have any problems?" And he said, "No, we aren't going to have any problems. I checked with Dulles. If they do their job we'll do our job." There are a whole bunch of tapes, because Hoover didn't realize that his phone has been tapped. Defrauding America, Rodney Stich, 3rd edition p. 638-639]:
No family has influenced the Council on Foreign Relations and the Bilderberg banking conference more than the Rockefeller family, especially David Rockefeller and Nelson Rockefeller back in his day.
Bilderberg was established in 1954 bringing together the ultra-elites of the USA and Europe to form a counter weight to the USSR.
CFR: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_on_..._Relations By the 1940's and for the next 50 years the Rockefellers had a firm grip on the CFR. The view of the members of the CFR on the Kennedy Assassination for the past 47 years has been totalitarian in their support of the discredited "lone nutter theory." I am only half kidding when I say that the role of the Council on Foreign Relations has been to murder John Kennedy and then cover up for it for 50 years. CFR members - whether they were LBJ people (Jack Valenti, Bill Moyers) , Kennedy people (Katzenbach), Rockefeller people (ha, ha they all are!), Republicans, Democrats, liberals (think Anthony Lewis) conservatives (William F. Buckley), old guys Nelson Rockefeller, young guys (Michael Gerson speechwriter for GWB), no matter what part of the country they are from, whether they are TV guys (Peter Jennings, Dan Rather), writers, columnists (James Reston), government officials Donald Rumsfeld, titans of media (Rupert Murdoch) or pedophiles (George Herbert Walker Bush) ... their stated and allowed views are TOTALITARIAN IN SUPPORT OF THE "LONE NUTTER" SCAM. And lets not forget that the Rockefellers and their minions hand selected and self picked ALL the several thousand members of the Council on Foreign Relations. I think this strongly implies ROCKEFELLER PARTICIPATION in the JFK assassination: the totalitarian position of the CFR and Bilderberg attendees on the JFK assassination in support of the fantasy "lone nutter" scam. A special word about the Council on Relations role in the 1963 Coup d'Etat and cover up: no other organization has been more responsible for the murder and cover up of John Kennedy than the CFR. Elite CFR members such as Allen Dulles, Nelson Rockefeller and George Herbert Walker Bush were probably sponsors of the JFK assassination. Certainly leadership CFR members such as Allen Dulles, John J. McCloy, and Gerald Ford played the most critical roles in the Warren Commission farce. Add in cover up roles played by Nelson Rockefeller (CFR), Henry Kissinger (CFR), Richard Helms (CFR), William Colby CIA/CFR, McGeorge Bundy (CFR), Nicholas Katzenbach (CFR), Jack Valenti (CFR), Bill Moyers (CFR), William Coleman (CFR) James Reston NY Times (CFR), Anthony Lewis NY Times (CFR), William F. Buckley (CFR),
Walter Cronkite CBS (CFR), Dan Rather CBS (CFR), Peter Jennings ABC (CFR), Daniel Schorr (CFR), Arthur Ochs Sulzberger NY Times (CFR), Kenneth Gilmore Readers' Digest (CFR), Stephen Rosenfeld Washington Post (CFR), Bobbie Ray Inman (CFR), Donald Rumsfeld (CFR), Rupert Murdoch FOX (CFR)… the list is almost endless. Note two things: 1) they are the key establishment players of BOTH major political parties spanning decades 2) their power and influence is directly proportional to the fantastic whoppers they tell about in the 1963 Coup d'Etat. For the older CFR members it is a case of PARTICIPATION and COVER UP in the JFK assassination. For the younger ones such as George Will (CFR), Charles Krauthammer (CFR), Bill Kristol (CFR), David Gergen (CFR), John Segenthaler (CFR), Frank Sesno (CFR), Michael Beschloss (CFR), Michael Gerson (CFR) it is a case of WILLFUL IGNORANCE as they still push the Big Lie. Note: Chris Matthews of Hardball, another willfully ignorant man, is close friends with Richard Haass, current president of CFR. I have never seen the highly acclaimed political guru Michael Barone, a Bilderberger attendee, ever say anything credible on the JFK assassination.
Question: do we really expect the CFR to admit that some of its elite members slaughtered John Kennedy and many more played integral roles in the cover up? No, but it is important to highlight that the Council on Foreign Relations has stunk up the place with tremendous amounts of radioactive horse manure relating to the 1963 Coup d'Etat.
Peace counter to the business model. Kennedy replaced with Johnson; Khrushchev replaced with Brezhnev. War is better; cui bono: there's the sponsor.
Our friend the investment banker retired from a career in Boston and New York wrote a two-page letter to Robert Caro in 1998 sharing a copy with me reporting a visit to his Boston house summer of 63 by a hissing Eliot Janeway warning what a "dangerous man this Kennedy is."
Jack has mentioned Brzezinski twice. Zbigniew Brzezinski and Robert Gates coauthored the 2004 Council on Foreign Relations paper Iran: Time for a New Approach.
Jim D cites Iran-Contra as a model of the Power Elite, sub rosa dealings with our reputed enemy Iran. Now the former DCI and Bush SecDef is the Obama SecDef. Despite superficial differences there exists a persistent dark matter comprising ninety per cent of the universe, though imperceptible by standard means.
From Angleton through Moore and DeMohrenschildt, Oswald was created in the form of the perfect patsy, threatening war if blown, thanks to the intercession of Phillips, as per Jim DiEugenio's analysis citing sources, making it clear the lone nut was anything but, serving as he did for ONI, CIA, FBI.
Kennedy was a departure from business as usual. Why, he endangered the Federal Reserve. The military-industrial complex wasn't going to get its war. The CIA was going to have to stay on the sidewalk, or worse, on the porch.
Bugliosi is the same as Posner, and in a similar vein as Nelson and Waldron et al: nothing to see here, no one living to blame, all unfortunate events of the past hermetically sealed from the present.
And we may well ask any number of questions lethal to such analgesia, e.g., how was Posner able to interview Nosenko. For the sap runs strong in the tree still.
Banister described Oswald as "one of ours."
And Banister was dead.
Cronkite is cited as on the side of Satan; and Cronkite's analysis of Tet was the cue for Johnson to exit; King struck the next month. Bobby the next.
Hoover dead in 72; Johnson 73; Nixon adios 74; Ford brings in Rockefeller and puts Bush at CIA.
The Band Plays On.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]1767[/ATTACH]
Disclaimer: Plausibly deniable spokesperson; Not privy to who struck John
The President was warned NOT to go to the Vice-President's home state beforehand, or THEY would kill him.
The President went to the Vice-President's home state anyway.
He was killed.
Then, amidst the rancor that the VP was involved in the murder and his pal, the FBI director knew of the murder in advance, the FBI director declares the crime the work of a lone nut ( before any of the evidence is even examined by the FBI ). Unconvinced by the FBI's subsequent "summary report", Congress threatens its own investigation, which causes the VP ( now President ) to select his own commission to evaluate the FBI's report.
The Commission concurs with the FBI summary report that the crime was the work of one man.
Johnson was certainly part of a conspiracy to obstruct justice, at the very least. He took control of the investgation in Dallas and had the FBI seize the evidence in the case, for which it had no jurisdiction.
He was personally responsible for the destruction of evidence, to wit, the the rebuilding of the limousine. The car was a crime scene and as such should have been processed as any crime scene would have.
BTW, the destruction of evidence is an impeachable offense.
Hoover for his part, lied, omitted, distorted and ignored crucial evidence in the case, not the least of which came in the form of witnesses who were among the closest to the crime.
This was no Mafia hit, although the Mafia knew it was coming.
This was no Castro or Khrushchev murder.
Illuminati ? I don't think so.
This was a Texas-based conspiracy to put LBJ in the White House and change American foreign policy. It had the support of elements in the Federal Government including the SS, the US military, the CIA and the FBI.
This was about the future of America. The exportation of Western democracy to countries who did not want it. The supporting of pro-American foreign governments who used US-taught methods of torture to keep their populaces under control. It was about the opening of new free markets from which to sell our goods. It was about American jobs that depended on the continuation of the Cold War.
Gil Jesus Wrote:This was a Texas-based conspiracy to put LBJ in the White House and change American foreign policy. It had the support of elements in the Federal Government including the SS, the US military, the CIA and the FBI.
This was about the future of America. The exportation of Western democracy to countries who did not want it. The supporting of pro-American foreign governments who used US-taught methods of torture to keep their populaces under control. It was about the opening of new free markets from which to sell our goods. It was about American jobs that depended on the continuation of the Cold War.
It was about Vietnam and beyond.
Hello Gil,
I case I haven't so noted publicly, I'm very glad that you're contributing to DPF. The images you bring to our attention are invaluable.
I must forcefully disagree with the portion of your analysis summarized by the first 13 words quoted above -- at least until you can clarify your term "Texas-based".
As it stands, the two paragraphs quoted in this post seem riddled with contradictions -- beginning with the conflict between the aforementioned 13 words and the 5 that follow.
I would also suggest that the conspiracy was neither domestic nor foreign in terms of its Sponsors' deepest motivations.
23-01-2011, 03:48 PM (This post was last modified: 23-01-2011, 04:04 PM by Charles Drago.)
Jack White Wrote:This is the most important thing said so far in this thread:
Conspiracy at this level and on this scale does not involve a secret central planner with occult rituals who executes top-down, command-and-control operations.
No planner??? Then the "thinker" who wrote this material must enlighten us: How did the complex, convoluted, multi-faceted, and multi-discipline JFK conspiracy come into being? How were its elements controlled and executed? Was it all just fortuitous coincidence for the individuals who from this point forward I shall derisively identify as the Congruents?
Also, this paragraph reveals utter confusion on its author(s)' part in terms of distinctions between Sponsors and Facilitators. He or she clearly has no working model for the assassination conspiracy.
And who the hell is talking about "occult rituals"? Not me, my friend.
This is classic straw man material. A feint. A dodge. Pay no attention to the fool behind the curtain.
It doesn't pass the laugh test.
Jack White Wrote:Instead, Justin Raimondo puts it best when he commented on the penetrating work of Murray Rothbard: "Here there is no single agency, no omnipotent central committee that issues directives, but a multiplicity of interest groups and factions whose goals are generally congruent. In this milieu, there are familial, social, and economic connections, as well as ideological complicity, and none is better than Rothbard at ferreting out and unraveling these biographical details. Taken together, the author's small and studied brushstrokes paint a portrait of a ruling class whose ruthlessness is surpassed only by its brazen disloyalty to the nation."5 Congruent interests is the key phrase rather than conspiracy.
So let me get this straight: The Congruents' anti-Kennedy interests magically coalesced in Dealey Plaza? The Congruents' don't talk to each other? The Congruents exist in isolation?
Also, what sort of mind would find value in the false "interests" and "conspiracy" comparison? OF COURSE the JFK Sponsors shared motives. But unless they conspired to attack JFK, we are left with what ... multiple lone Facilitators and Mechanics finding there way to Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963?
And what sort of mind would attempt to find within a general discussion of the nature of the Power Elite (my term) direct relevance to the JFK conspiracy?
I'll answer that for you: A mind that measures the value of a hypothesis in direct proportion to the number of its citations. Hey, if it's published, it must be true. And if I cite the publication, I must be very well read and very smart and completely correct in my assumptions.
This is pathetic.
Whoever constructed the quote you so admire was simply cherry-picking segments from diverse texts to defend a model of the assassination that is, to be kind, devoid of logic and starved of data and reasoning.
Jack White Wrote:Recognition of this world of powerful "congruent interests" opens up our understanding of the assassination of President Kennedy as well as of 9/11. We have no better suspect for who wielded the glue to bind together congruent interests than the eastern banking establishment's senior partner, the Rockefellers.[/SIZE][/B]
Ahh, the Congruents again. But wait! Haven't we rejected "conspiracy" in the JFK case? If so, then how would this gifted commentator define the act of "binding together" [redundant; it is the construction of a kid whose dog ate the homework and who thus desperately conflates quantity of words with quality of thought] the Congruents into an action to eliminate JFK?
Utter balderdash, Jack.
From its opening straw man premise, to its myriad internal contradictions and distinctions without differences, to its fatally flawed intellectual underpinnings and absence of academic rigor revealed in its glaring failure of focus, this statement would earn an "F" in a freshman Critical Thinking course.
Unless it was being taught by Ken Rahn.
Jack, I love you and respect you. But you're buying a bucket of steam.
Gil Jesus Wrote:No contradiction at all. Texas was rife with military contractors.
Thanks.
So I take it that, in your view, military contractors based in Texas had the authority to order the international security state to kill an American president.
One way I think to look at this is to use as a model other CIA coups. If you read that marvelous book Bitter Fruit, or study things like the 1953 overthrow of Mossaadegh, or what David Phillips' called the Agency's masterpiece, the overthrow of Sukarno in 1965, or the murder of Allende in 1973--reportedly done by an agent of Phillips, you get an inside view of how covert operations work and how they originate.
The more we look at the JFK murder, I think even LBJ advocates have to understand that it has all the earmarks of a covert op--and a first class one. As Victor Marchetti said once, it had to be an intelligence operation, because it was such a great one. I mean just look at one aspect of it: the use of Hal Hendrix to get the cover story out about Oswald. And that happened within 2 hours of the murder.
Or look at the use of the meeting that never happened: Oswald with Kostikov in Mexico City. This was a twofer, it got to LBJ and he used it to intimidate the hell out of Warren. And once Warren was emasculated, this allowed McCloy, Dulles, and Ford, what I call the troika to take over--and did they ever. Now this last, as John Newman proves, was planned in advance by Jim Angleton, with help from Phillips.
The way that say the Arbenz coup began, was as Jack said, a flux of congruent interests. Corporate interests from United Fruit began to talk to the Dulles brothers. They hired lawyers to lobby the White House. This then allowed Allen Dulles to call in his planning committee, and they put together the blueprint. At this stage, Phillips and Hunt were just operatives. They slowly worked their way up the daisy chain until by the Bay of Pigs, they were at the management level.
Now if we look at what happened to Allende, its much the same thing. You had a congruence of interests from the business world, Rockefeller and McCone linking up with the White House, Kissinger and Nixon. (Recall the great line by Henry: I don't see why we have to sit back and let a country go communist just because its people voted for it.)
By this time, due to his work on JFK and Indonesia, Helms makes Phillips one of the major architects of the plot: see that valuable book by Freed and Landis, Death in Washington. At this same time, Helms' who has to know of their work on JFK, is using Hunt as his infiltrator in the White House, along with his personal "black operator" Jim McCord, who according to Jm Wave supervisor Marty Casey, actually did wet jobs for Helms. So when Allende is being overthrown, Helms is also at work on ousting Nixon.
So yes, there seems to be a congruence of interests that begins the overthrow plots. But once the decision is made, it is the people who have great experience in these things, the black operators, who are then tasked with carrying them out. With help of course from the Power Elite with the media part of the cover story.
By the way, I think this is much more valuable than arguing with David Lifton about his body alteration theory on Spartacus.
