Michael Piper and Final Judgment

[Albert Doyle]

I think my point is not to throw out this very legitimate Kennedy Assassination Mediterranean china shop by either knee-jerking anti-semitism, deep political structure, or anti-jewish antipathy too strongly.

Does this mean Israel should be above suspicion?

No. It probably means Israel was no more the "Mastermind" than Johnson.

[Albert Doyle]

[
Then why didn't they prevent the attack by Israel on the USS Liberty?

Is it in the interests of these sponsors to have their crucial assets at loggerheads?

The strong hull of the Liberty and clever radio antenna wiring by the crew prevented the intended false flag from occurring. Otherwise the confusion that occurred would have given America the excuse to come in on the side of the Israeli's against the Soviet-backed arabs. That was the divide the plotters sought and the same divide JFK tried to prevent and was murdered for. But it was a divide and method seen elsewhere in the world besides Israel, like in SE Asia etc.

The Liberty attack showed the full true face of US/Israeli intel and how they kill their own for their greater purposes. As did the lack of any meaningful reaction by "the people" once the evidence was clear. The USS Liberty attack was a microcosm of Dealey Plaza.

[Magda Hassan]

The main reason I believe Israel and its hardline supporters in the US were the driving force behind JFK's death is that, as far as I can see, Israel was the only one of all the suspects who extracted a tangible gain from JFK's removal. I hasten to add that the MIC also made a profit also but I don't regard Israel and the weapons industry to be mutually exclusive. Many hardline Zionists have large investments in the industry.

So do Quakers. So do Anglicans. So do atheists. Even the Roman Catholic Church has investments in armaments. So do hedge funds. So do many pension funds. Maybe your pension fund even. But the Vatican wasn't behind the assassination either.

There is more than one kind of Zionism. And there is more than one kind of political Zionism.

Lots of people and groups gained by the removal of JFK. Careers flourished. Bank accounts grew. New industries grew massively. Nations disappeared. New ones created. Just look at it all today. It wasn't florists who benefited.

What were the tangible gains? First and foremost was its nuclear capability. I believe Kennedy's intransigent opposition to a nuclear Israel was regarded by hardline Zionists as an existiential threat to their nation's survival. The timeline on this is very clear. Once LBJ took over the pressure valve was switched off and Israel suddenly became much more willing to allow 'limited' inspections of Dimona by American inspectors (all on Israel's terms of course). It was all sham and window dressing, as some of the inspection parties complained.

Nuclear proliferation was the name of the game in those days. Remember the song by Tom Lehrer? The Treaty was brought in to effect in 1968 to deal with that very issue. It looks like Japan has been engaged in illegal enrichment for nuclear weapons for some time, how long ? and we only found that out because of the earthquake and tidal wave. And the media is still not talking about that. And when was the last time the US arsenal was inspected? And by whom? The whole nuclear industry with their peaceful atoms and their pretence at safety and control is a sham in all sorts of ways and not just restricted to Israel. Israel's programme was started and achieved what they wanted before JFK was even president. Fait acomplis. No need for more.

The other tangible gain was military funding, which grew from zero to $300 million from 1963 to 1967. LBJ helped Israel become the regional superpower.

Indeed he did. But there is also some confusion about what Israel is with some people. Sure Israel exhibits all the traits of 19th century romantic Nationalism from which it sprang. As did Italy and Germany and others. Certainly for some there is the usual nationalistic clap trap, homeland, flag, blood, mythic history etc. And certainly there are some Israelis and Jews (they are not the same by a long shot) who harbour a typical colonial vision of a greater Israel for either religious or political territorial growth. But Israel is not just a Jewish thing. It is above all a European creation. It was on the books in the late 19th century in all the colonial powers foreign desks. It would solve Europe's problem of these unwelcome troublesome immigrants if they could be removed elsewhere. This became especially so after the recent embarrassing excess of the Germans and was supported by people of good hearts as well as cold ones for different reasons. But it was not for this reason alone that the creation of Israel was decided on by Europe. Far more important was the opportunity to have a European outpost in the middle of the Arab world. Strategic for all sorts of reasons. Oh, and the oil. And the canal. The last thing Europe wanted was a unified independent Pan Arabia. It is a huge and valuable area. Far to valuable for the natives to run it for them selves. As long as Israel is where it is there will be disunity in the Middle east. The Israel project will get all the funding it needs to keep going until it has outlived its usefulness and then it wont. Too many people beside some Israelis and some Zionist dreamers have an investment in that. For now.

But there was billions of dollars in foreign and military aid spent in all sorts of ways in all sorts of places all over the world. Not just Israel. Because there was an red under every bed in those days. Freedom had to be defended. Communists destroyed. Al Qaida came later. It's been boom times since 1963 for some.

No way Kennedy would have gone along with this. He wanted any funding of Israel to be tied to concessions to the Palestinians.

There were a lot of things that Kennedy would not have gone along with which is why he was removed. Palestinians the least of it. Invasion of Cuba. US military involvement in war in Vietnam. Over throw of Allende had he been around. And the mass murders in Indonesia. But it probably never would have got to that because they got to him first.

Another compelling reason is that the mainstream media-naturally there was little alternative media back then-was owned by those sympathetic to Zionism. Paley, Sarnoff and the rest. That's why the media has actively discouraged genuine investigations into JFK's death for the last 49 years. This crime would never have remained unsolved for so long unless those complicit in it had control of the media.

Katherine Graham, Bill Colby before his canoeing accident and several others as well as the known existence of Mockingbird have shown us the media is far from free and open and is heavily controlled by reactionary forces. For the same reasons they are who they are they have no interest in the truth of the assassination of JFK or many other world events. They already know the truth. That's all that matters.

Once LBJ was sworn in, they had control of the Government as well, and all the sham Government inquiries which followed.

Sham governments do sham inquiries. The office of President is a ceremonial position only. Those that perform in any meaningful way are removed. They already had control of the real government. Which is why JFK was removed.

Anyone who thinks Israel didn't have the power and influence to carry it out doesn't know Israel.

I know Israel all too well. It is insane and divided against itself and unlikely to survive in its current form for a variety of reason including its own internal contradictions.

They still carry out covert assassinations on a regular basis. Four Iranian nuclear scientists have been murdered in the last two years so their reach can even extend to overtly hostile countries.

Nothing particularly clever about that. Just general trade craft. Thousands of unsolved murders every year. Thousands of suspicious ones too.

And to those who think Israel should be placed above suspicion I would just remind them that at various times the Governments of Cuba, Russia and even the US have been nominated as sponsors. Why should Israel be off limits, given their bellicose past and present?

The government of Cuba and the USSR/Russia were never seriously considered as sponsors. Even by the people who put them forward as such who put them forward as such to further their own various agenda. Eg. LBJ, Warren, Hoover, JCS etc. While individual Cubans or Soviets may have been involved in the events of the assassination it had nothing to do with Cuba or the USSR and those countries clearly had nothing to gain by such an action. Same goes for Jews and Israelis though Israel may have had a bone or two thrown its way it wasn't a thank you for any work (not) done just self interest. The dog still wags the tail.

[Charles Drago]

Sorry Mark, but those roles are played by Facilitators.

So what role is played by the sponsor?

The Sponsor is at the top of the food chain -- a supra-national "interest" for which wars (cold and hot), national identification and patriotism, and organized religions are tools used to keep the many at each others' throats so that control by the few can be preserved and strengthened.

The Sponsor's will be done.

The Sponsor ordered JFK's murder.

[Charles Drago]

The US would never let itself be controlled by a small country like Israel unless it served a purpose. Once you understand Johnson served Israel's purposes as a power that didn't have to unless it wanted to then you understand the Sponsors were in control of both Israel and the US.

Then why didn't they prevent the attack by Israel on the USS Liberty?

Is it in the interests of these sponsors to have their crucial assets at loggerheads?

At times, yes. Illusions must be maintained. Fealties must be strengthened through the encouragement of jealousy and the competition for attention and affection it engenders.

[Albert Doyle]

So do Quakers. So do Anglicans. So do atheists. Even the Roman Catholic Church has investments in armaments. So do hedge funds. So do many pension funds. Maybe your pension fund even. But the Vatican wasn't behind the assassination either.

There is more than one kind of Zionism. And there is more than one kind of political Zionism.

Lots of people and groups gained by the removal of JFK. Careers flourished. Bank accounts grew. New industries grew massively. Nations disappeared. New ones created. Just look at it all today. It wasn't florists who benefited.

Sure, but none so grossly disproportionately or directly benefiting as Israel. Don't ignore the fact Israel has the strongest lobby in the world sitting right in the middle of the US government in the AIPAC Lobby. While what you write is true to some degree it doesn't nearly represent an accurate reflection of the hugely disproportionate influence and benefit Israel accrues from this relationship. Recently the president announced Israel and the US's interests are one in the same.

Nuclear proliferation was the name of the game in those days. Remember the song by Tom Lehrer? The Treaty was brought in to effect in 1968 to deal with that very issue. It looks like Japan has been engaged in illegal enrichment for nuclear weapons for some time, how long ? and we only found that out because of the earthquake and tidal wave. And the media is still not talking about that. And when was the last time the US arsenal was inspected? And by whom? The whole nuclear industry with their peaceful atoms and their pretence at safety and control is a sham in all sorts of ways and not just restricted to Israel. Israel's programme was started and achieved what they wanted before JFK was even president. Fait acomplis. No need for more.

Forgive me Magda, but this doesn't accurately cover the ongoing impasse Kennedy's ban represented or how Israel was in the process of fabricating those weapons at the time. There are serious imperatives and junctures your overview neglects. You should read Piper. Angleton was busy undermining Kennedy's power by supplying Israel with blueprints and materials behind his back. Angleton was a zionist and CIA liaison to Israel. In effect the powers that killed Kennedy were using the CIA to subvert the democratic process and therefore gain power for themselves. And don't think Lansky, Ben Gurion and Mossad were not aware of this. Israel was a key conscious facilitator and benefactor of this conscious re-ordering of the American government power structure in the fascist direction.

Indeed he did. But there is also some confusion about what Israel is with some people. Sure Israel exhibits all the traits of 19th century romantic Nationalism from which it sprang. As did Italy and Germany and others. Certainly for some there is the usual nationalistic clap trap, homeland, flag, blood, mythic history etc. And certainly there are some Israelis and Jews (they are not the same by a long shot) who harbour a typical colonial vision of a greater Israel for either religious or political territorial growth. But Israel is not just a Jewish thing. It is above all a European creation. It was on the books in the late 19th century in all the colonial powers foreign desks. It would solve Europe's problem of these unwelcome troublesome immigrants if they could be removed elsewhere. This became especially so after the recent embarrassing excess of the Germans and was supported by people of good hearts as well as cold ones for different reasons. But it was not for this reason alone that the creation of Israel was decided on by Europe. Far more important was the opportunity to have a European outpost in the middle of the Arab world. Strategic for all sorts of reasons. Oh, and the oil. And the canal. The last thing Europe wanted was a unified independent Pan Arabia. It is a huge and valuable area. Far to valuable for the natives to run it for them selves. As long as Israel is where it is there will be disunity in the Middle east. The Israel project will get all the funding it needs to keep going until it has outlived its usefulness and then it wont. Too many people beside some Israelis and some Zionist dreamers have an investment in that. For now.

A lengthy explanation that doesn't really change anything Mark said, in my opinion. In the end none of those comparisons come close to the grotesque relationship Israel currently has with the US. As Piper points out, the epicenter and origin of all this was the Kennedy assassination. There's no argument Israel was, and continues to be, the biggest benefactor from the assassination.

But there was billions of dollars in foreign and military aid spent in all sorts of ways in all sorts of places all over the world. Not just Israel. Because there was an red under every bed in those days. Freedom had to be defended. Communists destroyed. Al Qaida came later. It's been boom times since 1963 for some.

Nothing comes close in proportion, nor do any of those other recipients enjoy the massive influence and relationship Israel does upon the US government and its war force.

There were a lot of things that Kennedy would not have gone along with which is why he was removed. Palestinians the least of it. Invasion of Cuba. US military involvement in war in Vietnam. Over throw of Allende had he been around. And the mass murders in Indonesia. But it probably never would have got to that because they got to him first.

But there's still a logarithm here that signals back through Piper's network. If you examine Piper's information and arguments, if you follow the money, none of those other causes had the influence or power that the Israel-controlled Mediterranean network had. CIA tends to seek these willing collaborators and shadow powers in which to hide its maneuvers. They had that in Israel in vast proportion. If you look for an unquestionable cause and politically-untouchable power you'll most likely find CIA's bloody footprints behind their curtains. The Lansky-based US syndicate was such a power with its zionist financial leaders, as was Angleton and his CIA/Mossad bond. None of those other right-wing causes had such a powerful network behind it so closely related to covert US powers.

I know Israel all too well. It is insane and divided against itself and unlikely to survive in its current form for a variety of reason including its own internal contradictions.

The perpetual threat to survival being the justification of that which makes sure it survives.

The government of Cuba and the USSR/Russia were never seriously considered as sponsors. Even by the people who put them forward as such who put them forward as such to further their own various agenda. Eg. LBJ, Warren, Hoover, JCS etc. While individual Cubans or Soviets may have been involved in the events of the assassination it had nothing to do with Cuba or the USSR and those countries clearly had nothing to gain by such an action. Same goes for Jews and Israelis though Israel may have had a bone or two thrown its way it wasn't a thank you for any work (not) done just self interest. The dog still wags the tail.

A bone or two thrown its way??? Israel receives unquestioned massive funding and never loses a political decision from the US government. It brags about being in control of the US government and enjoys the most powerful lobby in history occupying a main position of control within that government. It now has the US government fighting a war crime-induced war for regional control in the Middle East. So, yes, while this could still be an act of self-interest by those really in control, remember that what the tail is doing is a good indicator of how that dog feels and its intentions. I think Israel pretends to be no different than anybody else just like the US Military Industrial Complex pretends to be just defending itself like anyone else. And, yes, pretends to be a JFK Assassination facilitator just like any of the other facilitators...

[Phil Dragoo]

From #46:

I select this as an exemplar of the omnipotence attributed to Israel:

Israel receives unquestioned massive funding and never loses a political decision from the US government. It brags about being in control of the US government and enjoys the most powerful lobby in history occupying a main position of control within that government. It now has the US government fighting a war crime-induced war for regional control in the Middle East.

I see the disparate philosophies of Zbigniew Brzezinski and Robert Gates (representing Carter and Bush) in their coauthorship of the 2004 Council on Foreign Relations paper "Iran: Time for a New Approach." They counsel negotiation.

CIA installed the Shah. Carter saw to it that the Ayatollah ascended. Can this benefit Israel? How?

This week's Foreign Affairs cover Why Iran Should Get the Bomb by Kenneth Waltz posits balancing Israel's weapons with Iran's:

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/1...t-the-bomb

By what magical potency has Israel arranged this?

Putin publicly announces he has warned off Israel from any attack on Iranhe does this in front of his flexible friend Barry the Chicago Mufti.

Barry and Hillary exclude Israel from the counterterrorism conference.

Their recent campaign has used CIA and NATO to remove secular regimes and replace them with Islamist ones. In Egypt the winner proclaims sharia, jihad, dying for Islam, and warrants a congratulatory call from Barry.


Proclamations of Israel as the dominatrix of nation states to the contrary notwithstanding, it appears the shots are called elsewhere.

Allegations Israel sponsored the assassination of the 35[SUP]th[/SUP] president wouldin light of subsequent sublime work by George Michael Evica, L. Fletcher Prouty, Peter Dale Scott and James Douglass (to name four)of necessity imply it still calls the shots.

It is in the nature of the sponsor to be the prime mover transcending nations, religions, politics, which are merely leaves moving in its wind.

There is more than a little zen here: the sponsor who can be named cannot be the true sponsor for precisely the reason that it is the unseen (unspeakable) wielder of power.

The case against Israel rests on obsession rather than demonstrable proofs.

Observing the decades of Rockefeller interests manipulating the economic battlefield in South America using U.S. diplomacy, CIA dirty tricks, Green Beret combatants and advisors, through assassination, insurgency, pacification shows an exercise of power on the scale necessary to obtain sponsorship.

The point being that the power is not Communism, nor fascism, nor Islam, nor Zionism, that all of these and more serve the interest of the sponsor.

Removing Saddam Hussein to replace him with an Islamist state does not benefit Israel, but it may benefit either or both Saudi Arabia and Iran.

In Afghanistan, building sand castles for ten years will benefit arms manufacturers and heroin smugglers, but leaves Pakistan in place like the evening tide.

Israel served as a destination for those Hitler wished to relocate, whom the Grand Mufti and Himmler sought to exterminate.

It has survived but hardly as the Professor Moriarty of London's web of crime.

I look at somebody like David Rockefeller. When Henry Kissinger whispers something about Vietnamese oil. About Kennedy's obstruction.

And they say Marcello said take the stone out of my shoe.

The silver train is going to run.

It's got no insignia, symbol or emblem.

Swastika, hammer & sickle, Star of David, corporate logo, or sanitized, don't be on the tracksthere will be blood.

[Magda Hassan]

What he said :cheer:

[Mark Stapleton]

Magda, I was going to reply to your post (#43) but Albert beat me to it.

Seriously, it's absurd to compare the influence of Quakers, Anglicans and Atheists etc, to the influence Israel and its lobby exerts on the US Congress.

No other group or nation recieves the financial support from America that Israel does. Which other group or lobby can force the passage of such a generous resolution through Congress by a margin of 460 to 2?

https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/sho...ct-of-2012

No other nation can make Congressmen quake in their boots with threats of adverse media coverage or funding pullouts the way Israel can.

And while others may have benefitted from Kennedy's death, history has shown that no party recieved the tangible gains or consolidated its power and influence more than Israel did.

And as we all now know, no country boasts a more sophisticated and ruthless intelligence apparatus, specialising in assassination and false flag operations, than Israel. The CIA couldn't even knock off Castro, for God's sake.

[Mark Stapleton]

The US would never let itself be controlled by a small country like Israel unless it served a purpose. Once you understand Johnson served Israel's purposes as a power that didn't have to unless it wanted to then you understand the Sponsors were in control of both Israel and the US.

Then why didn't they prevent the attack by Israel on the USS Liberty?

Is it in the interests of these sponsors to have their crucial assets at loggerheads?

At times, yes. Illusions must be maintained. Fealties must be strengthened through the encouragement of jealousy and the competition for attention and affection it engenders.

So these shadowy, all powerful sponsors have the US and Israel on a leash like a pair of poodles?

Occasionally they take them for a walk to the park and let them off the leash so they can play? Sometimes the play gets a little rough.

I doubt Avigdor Lieberman, Ehud Barak and Benjamin Netanyahu would agree. I don't think anyone has them on a leash.