I have to say I agree with Jan and CD, Mark. Your efforts are genuine but you have to forgive the cynicism CD has. In many ways I share it. I also agree with GB and Pete's sentiments. I wouldn't quote Ford for the life of me. Ford was a major league asshole for starters. Churchill was a stirring speaker for sure. But he was really nothing more than a tory asshole who got the sack after the war. People also forget he was a key decision maker in the Gallipoli balls up in WWI which saw thousands of Kiwis and Aussies die senselessly. An action he was unrepentant about till he died the prick.
"In the Kennedy assassination we must be careful of running off into the ether of our own imaginations." Carl Ogelsby circa 1992
Quote:Seamus Coogan sez: "But he [Churchill] was really nothing more than a tory asshole who got the sack after the war."
Interesting, if not adaptive, use of the word "tory" --no? Can't quite get my head around that connotation. However, judging from your
context, the same could be said of Nikita Khrushchev shortly following JFK's demise. Of course, Stalin believed that Churchill was part
of a much larger "presence" of power, much like Prouty told me was the case with Averell Harriman.
Men of means... by no means, [yet, somehow] Kings of the Road. Indeed. True of Churchill, not at all of Harriman.
As for Mr. Prior's petty little project. Sorry to say, but if my daughter had a similar pursuit when she was 10 years old (but not a day older)
I'd have forgiven her folly. After that...not so much.
GO_SECURE
monk
"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."
Well the term 'tory' should have been used with a capital 'T' lol. Of course there is a lot of usage for it Historically. The context I have put it in GB is with regard the hard right of the Conservative Party in the UK. The same sort of people that are essentially the Liberal Party in Australia and in the National Party in NZ. Khrushchev, hmmmmm interesting but I see no real correlation in my comments about Winston and Nikita. Nonetheless, I am aware of Prouty's comments however. I've always found his take on Harriman very interesting truth be told. As for Mark I think enthusiasm is taking the place of common sense for sure. I wouldn't give up on him just yet lol.
"In the Kennedy assassination we must be careful of running off into the ether of our own imaginations." Carl Ogelsby circa 1992
Quote:Seamus Coogan sez: "But he [Churchill] was really nothing more than a tory asshole who got the sack after the war."
Interesting, if not adaptive, use of the word "tory" --no? Can't quite get my head around that connotation. However, judging from your
context, the same could be said of Nikita Khrushchev shortly following JFK's demise. Of course, Stalin believed that Churchill was part
of a much larger "presence" of power, much like Prouty told me was the case with Averell Harriman.
Men of means... by no means, [yet, somehow] Kings of the Road. Indeed. True of Churchill, not at all of Harriman.
As for Mr. Prior's petty little project. Sorry to say, but if my daughter had a similar pursuit when she was 10 years old (but not a day older)
I'd have forgiven her folly. After that...not so much.
I think Greg is referring to the sacking part and not the Tory part with regards to Krushchev and Churchill. It is a mistake to use Churchill as a symbol of unity. He is not loved or remembered fondly in most places due to his wanton disregard for human lives other than those of his own class.
"The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it." Karl Marx
"He would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies. When asked in court whether she knew that Lord Astor had denied having sex with her.
“I think it would be a good idea” Ghandi, when asked about Western Civilisation.
Speaking of wait and see lists your still on mine GB rofl. I have a feeling we'll work out fine.
Did you get my email on the Oswald photo? I've had some real problems with format as I've been using Open Office which isn't compatible with much.
I read Trento's book on the 'Secret History of the CIA' indeed I own it. I don't put much stock in the Brezhnev factions murder of JFK and a revolt in the USSR that for me is horse shit. However, I can see how Nikita got creamed by that faction after JFK. Oh those Russians.
"In the Kennedy assassination we must be careful of running off into the ether of our own imaginations." Carl Ogelsby circa 1992
As I am set to begin the Conclusion of Guido Preparata's Conjuring Hitler*, I reflect with a shudder on the revelation of Chamberlain and Churchill as the good cop/bad cop for England's manipulation of the Second World War.
*I pass on the recommendation of this book I received from Charles--it is a cataclysmic revelation.
On top of Montagu Norman's directorship of the Bank of England (1920-1944) comes the whirlwind finale to the big storm. Czechoslovakia and Poland are sacrificed, the U.S. invasion is delayed until 1944, UK ends are achieved at a cost of tens of millions of lives.
Looking at a film like The Package (1989) with Gene Hackman and Tommy Lee Jones wherein US-Soviet interests align in the attempted sniper hit on the two heads of state, any suggestion by Trento or our wonderful font of misinformation Frank Fiorini-Sturgis von Hunt that Brezhnev or KGB or Kostikov did in the 35th president is balderdash of the type pouring out of the Castle like the immortal Niagara.
The Cold War was a business model, fine.
But the Second World War was to make the world safe for England.
Now we have a War on Terror to keep heroin prices stable and lock in a DeBeers value for oil.
So, sure, let's just petition the Castle then.
I'm sure they only keep those parchments secreted in weeping stone vaults because they don't realize how much we really, really want to see them.
Eloi, enjoy the flowers and the sunlight. Do not seek to know what is transpiring in the dark engines tended by the Morlocks.
Seamus Coogan Wrote:I don't put much stock in the Brezhnev factions murder of JFK and a revolt in the USSR that for me is horse shit. However, I can see how Nikita got creamed by that faction after JFK.
The point here, of course, is that you've wisely accepted the existence of competing factions within political structures that are inaccurately, commonly, and for sinister purposes described by mainstream authorities as being monolithic in nature and intent.
The "faction" that "creamed Nikita" is the "faction" that "creamed" JFK. I write of the true Sponsors of Dallas and other, related world-historic events. I write of, as George Michael Evica described them, "masters who were above Cold War differences."
Masters who conjured the Cold War and AH and Al Qaeda.
Phil Dragoo Wrote:So, sure, let's just petition the Castle then.
I'm sure they only keep those parchments secreted in weeping stone vaults because they don't realize how much we really, really want to see them.
Eloi, enjoy the flowers and the sunlight. Do not seek to know what is transpiring in the dark engines tended by the Morlocks.
We will fight them on the beaches.
(What do you mean, we.)
Precisely.
The public slaughter of JFK is not an "American crime".
It is a mass trauma scripted, crafted, with the flair of an ancient myth by the Usual Suspects.
Invoking the likes of Orator Churchill, High Priest of the Beaches, and Henry T Ford, God of Mass Production, ensures only that nothing is learnt.
Official History continues.
No revelation, no epiphany, into the nature of Power is achieved.
This is not a game.
JFK is not a brand.
"It means this War was never political at all, the politics was all theatre, all just to keep the people distracted...."
"Proverbs for Paranoids 4: You hide, They seek."
"They are in Love. Fuck the War." Gravity's Rainbow, Thomas Pynchon
"Ccollanan Pachacamac ricuy auccacunac yahuarniy hichascancuta." The last words of the last Inka, Tupac Amaru, led to the gallows by men of god & dogs of war
