JFK, ISRAEL, MOSSAD, CIA

The RODOH Lounge is a place for general discussion, preferably non-Holocaust. The Lounge is only lightly moderated but please keep this a friendly place to chat with and get to know your fellow board participants.
User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9373
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: JFK, ISRAEL, MOSSAD, CIA

Post by been-there »

montgomery2 wrote:
Sun Nov 04, 2018 8:55 pm
been-there wrote:
Sun Nov 04, 2018 8:34 pm
montgomery2 wrote:
Sun Nov 04, 2018 6:31 pm
been-there wrote:
Sun Nov 04, 2018 8:27 am
You are demonstrating a cognitive impairment based on irrational prejudice via stereotyping. Its a way of avoiding thinking and dealing with facts that cause discomfort.
I don't agree. Ihave made my decision on him by judging his character and I don't like what I saw. I could go on with more explanation but I don't think it would serve any purpose.
You don't agree? :o
But... You just did EXACTLY that.
You just agreed that you judged him based on stereotyping him. I.e. You just admitted that you "judged his character" by what you "saw" of him in a short 45 minute lecture. How do you think its possible to judge a person so quickly and so absolutely without resorting to prejudicial pre-concieved stereotypes?
Sheesh. You are so unself-aware and so in denial, its quite amazing.
No, no, no! You said I'm demonstrating a cognitive impairment and I'm not. I'm doing just the opposite ...Don't jump so fast to support creeps like Piper. Learn more about him first. I've already learned enough.

I'm interested though in learning of what you think I'm in denial over?
:? But... I just explained exactly what I "think" you are "in denial over". You seem unable to understand simple statements.
But here it comes again... I think you are in denial of your cognitive impairment as a result of your unconscious stereotyping which resulted in you holding an absolutist opinion of a man based upon watching 45 minutes of that person's fifty-year life.
You are compounding that cognitive impairment with even more denial, by pretending to yourself that I am "slow" and that you somehow know more about him than me.

If you can't understand the above, it is not so suprising that you can't critically analyse events like 911 and the JFK assassination.

The question any sane intelligent person need ask is why just his book exposing the Israeli/Mossad/Jewish-American/Jewish-mafia part in the JFK assassination would be effectively banned? Why not any of his other books?

No need to write any answers to that question, just think about it for a bit.
...He had been attacked by many Jewish groups such as the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of B'nai B'rith, the Simon Wiesenthal Centre, and the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), some of which labeled Piper as a promoter of antisemitic conspiracy theories and a Holocaust denier.[4]
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

SUPPORT RODOH!
Would you like to financially contribute to the upkeep of RODOH? Please kindly contact Scott Smith ([email protected]). Any and all contributions are welcome!


montgomery2
Posts: 405
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2018 1:04 pm
Contact:

Re: JFK, ISRAEL, MOSSAD, CIA

Post by montgomery2 »

been-there wrote:
Mon Nov 05, 2018 11:47 am
You are compounding that cognitive impairment with even more denial, by pretending to yourself that I am "slow" and that you somehow know more about him than me.

No need to write any answers to that question, just think about it for a bit.
I've thought over what you've suggested for a while and so I'm ready to give you some answers.
If you can't understand the above, it is not so suprising that you can't critically analyse events like 911 and the JFK assassination.
I'm willing to entertain your idea of me not being able to understand both of those but I reject your idea on the Kennedy assassination because I've read a lot of your theories and I find them to be weak. But your theory on 911 still interests me. Can you give me a chance to understand by telling me in general what your theory is? Nothing more than a paragrapy explaining how we could be differing on the understanding?
The question any sane intelligent person need ask is why just his book exposing the Israeli/Mossad/Jewish-American/Jewish-mafia part in the JFK assassination would be effectively banned? Why not any of his other books?
I don't think his book is 'literally' banned in the true sense of the word. I imagine that it's available somewhere in Canada but nobody bothers with it because of a general lack of interest. And I suspect that at least part of the reason is because he comes off as not really making any good points but rambles on as he did with his blackboard talk and the utube video I watched of him. Not to mention various other character flaws I noticed and will elaborate on if you wish. I just see him as a fukking weirdo, and a dead one at that. Let me know?

But let's get into my lack of understanding on the 911 thing. I'm approaching that one at least with an open mind.

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9373
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: JFK, ISRAEL, MOSSAD, CIA

Post by been-there »

Image

Fifteen years before Kennedy, zionists murdered James Forrestal

• LAURENT GUYÉNOT • JANUARY 27, 2020 •

Image
May 1963, JFK visits the grave of James Forrestal at Arlington cemetery

In Ben-Gurion’s mind, making Israel a nuclear state was a matter of life and death, and obliterating any obstacle was an absolute necessity. ...and would surely justify eliminating [a] U.S. president in order to replace him by a more supportive Vice President. Most dedicated Zionists understand that.
Andrew Adler, owner and editor in chief of The Atlanta Jewish Times, assumes that the idea “has been discussed in Israel’s most inner circle,” and, in his column of January 13, 2012, called on the Israeli Prime Minister to:
“give the go-ahead for U.S.-based Mossad agents to take out a president deemed unfriendly to Israel in order for the current Vice-President to take his place and forcefully dictate that the United States’ policy includes its helping the Jewish State obliterate its enemies. […] Order a hit on a president in order to preserve Israel’s existence.”[3]
Eliminating unsubmissive foreign leaders is part of Israel’s struggle for existence. Besides, it is entirely biblical:
foreign kings are supposed to “lick the dust at [Israelis’] feet” (Isaiah 49:23),
or perish, with their names “blotted out under heaven” (Deuteronomy 7:24).

On November 6, 1944, members of the Stern Gang, led by future Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, assassinated Lord Moyne, the British resident minister in the Middle East, for his anti-Zionist positions. The bodies of his murderers, executed in Egypt, were later exchanged for twenty Arab prisoners and buried at the “Monument of Heroes” in Jerusalem.

On September 17, 1948, the same terrorist group murdered in Jerusalem Count Folke Bernadotte, a Swedish diplomat appointed as United Nations mediator in Palestine. He had just submitted his report A/648, which described “large-scale Zionist plundering and destruction of villages,” and called for the “return of the Arab refugees rooted in this land for centuries.” His assassin, Nathan Friedman-Yellin, was arrested, convicted, and then amnestied; in 1960 he was elected to the Knesset.[4]

In 1946, three months after members of the Irgun, led by future Prime Minister Menachem Begin, killed ninety-one people in the headquarter of the British Mandate’s administration (King David Hotel), the same terrorist group attempted to murder British Prime Minister Clement Attlee and Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin, according to British Intelligence documents declassified in 2006.

These killings and more are documented by Israeli journalist Ronen Bergman in Rise and kill first: the secret history of Israel’s targeted assassinations (Random House, 2018). Bergman writes:
“At the end of 1947, a report to the British high commissioner tallied the casualties of the previous two years: 176 British Mandate personnel and civilians killed.
‘Only these actions, these executions, caused the British to leave,’ David Shomron said, decades after he shot Tom Wilkin dead on a Jerusalem street. ‘If [Avraham] Stern had not begun the war, the State of Israel would not have come into being.’”[5]
James Forrestal’s strange death
Absent from Israel’s body count in Bergman’s book is former U.S. Secretary of Defense James Forrestal, assassinated eight months after Count Bernadotte. Forrestal had been Roosevelt’s Secretary of the Navy from April 1944. With consolidation of the armed services under Truman in 1947, he became the first Secretary of Defense. He opposed the United Nations’ vote to partition Palestine, and protested vigorously against U.S. recognition of Israel on May 15, 1948, on the ground that U.S. interests in the Middle East would be seriously jeopardized by American sponsorship of a Jewish state. For this, Forrestal received “an outpouring of slander and calumny that must surely be judged one of the most shameful intervals in American journalism,” in the words of Robert Lovett, then Under Secretary of State.
Truman replaced Forrestal on March 28, 1949 — shortly after his re-election — by the man who had been his main fundraiser, Louis Johnson.

According to the received story, Forrestal, who was psychologically exhausted, immediately fell into a depression.
On April 2, 1949, he was interned against his will in the military hospital of the Navy in Bethesda, Maryland, a Washington, DC, suburb, where he was forcibly confined for seven weeks.
He fell to his death from the 16th floor at 1:50 in the morning of May 22, 1949, landing on the roof of the third floor. He had a dressing-gown sash tied around his neck.

National authorities and mainstream media immediately labeled his death a suicide, without any known criminal investigation. A review board was appointed on May 23, headed by Admiral Morton Willcutts, to conduct hearings of members of the hospital staff with the sole purpose of exonerating everyone of responsibility in Forrestal’s assumed suicide.
The board completed its work in one week, and published a short press release four months later. But the full report, containing the transcripts of all hearings an crucial exhibits, were kept secret for 55 years, until David Martin obtained it through a Freedom of Information Act request in April 2004 (it is now available on the Princeton University Library website in pdf form, or here in HTML rendition by the anonymous Mark Hunter, who makes useful comments).

In his book and in his web articles complementing it, David Martin makes a compelling case that Forrestal was murdered, and that his murder was ordered by the Zionists, most probably with the knowledge and approval of Truman, who was then completely hostage to the Zionists.
The motive? Forrestal was planning to write a book and to launch a national magazine: he had the money and the connections for it, and he had three thousand pages of personal diary to back his revelations on the corruption of American leadership and the sell-out of American foreign policy to communism under Roosevelt, and to Zionism under Truman.

I will here summarize the evidence accumulated by David Martin, and highlight the significance of this case for our understanding of Israel’s takeover of the heart, soul, and body of the United States. Unless specified otherwise, all information is from Martin’s book or articles.

From James Forrestal to John Kennedy
My own interest for this heartbreaking story stems from my interest for the Kennedy assassinations. (read my article 'Did Israel Kill the Kennedys?'). I found the connection and similarities between the two stories highly illuminating. Everyone knows that Kennedy was assassinated, yet most Americans are still unaware of the evidence incriminating Israel. In the case of Forrestal, it is the opposite: few people suspect a murder, but once the evidence for murder has been presented, it points directly to Israel as the culprit. For this reason, Forrestal’s assassination by the Zionists becomes a precedent that makes JFK’s assassination by the same collective entity more plausible. If Israel can kill a former U.S. Defense Secretary on American soil in 1949 and get away with it with government and media complicity, then why not a sitting President fifteen years later? If the truth on Forrestal had been known by 1963, it is unlikely that Israel could have killed two Kennedys with impunity.

Forrestal was of Irish Catholic origin like the Kennedys, and was close to JFK’s father. Both James Forrestal and Joseph Kennedy are examples of American patriots of Irish stock who were alarmed by Jewish influence over American foreign policy. The entry for 27 December 1945 in Forrestal’s edited diary, says:

“Played golf with Joe Kennedy. I asked him about his conversations with Roosevelt and Neville Chamberlain from 1938 on. […] Chamberlain, he says, stated that America and the world Jews had forced England into the war.”

One major difference between the two men is that Joe Kennedy had resigned from government after Roosevelt’s entry into the war, and had kept a low profile on Israel. Moreover, unlike Forrestal, he was the head of a wealthy clan and had his own men in the press. He was a politician, whereas Forrestal was an uncompromising man. These differences explain why Forrestal was assassinated, whereas Joe had his son elected president. Yet in the end, the Kennedys suffered the Talmudic curse over three generations.

When James Forrestal, hostile to Stalin’s ambitions on Eastern Europe and to Truman’s decision to nuke Japan, was kept away from the official delegation to the Potsdam Conference in the summer 1945, he flew there privately and took with him the then 28-year-old John Kennedy, for a tour of post-war Germany. Later on, John integrated James Forrestal’s son Michael Forrestal as a member of his National Security Council. In May 1963 he made a symbolic public gesture by visiting the grave of James Forrestal on Memorial Day.

...As Secretary of Defense, Forrestal had been subjected not only to slander and calumny by the press, but also to anonymous death threats. Robert Lovett, who shared Forrestal’s views on Israel, testified that he himself received night phone calls with death threats, and that Forrestal was more exposed than him to this kind of treatment.
Having lost all protection from the government after March 28, Forrestal had reasons to fear for his life. On May 23, 1949, The Washington Post concluded an article headlined “Delusions of persecution, acute anxiety, depression marked Forrestal’s illness,” with the somewhat paradoxical statement:
“His fear of reprisals from pro-Zionists was said to stem from attacks by some columnists on what they said was his opposition to partition of Palestine under a UN mandate. In his last year as Defense Secretary, he received great numbers of abusive and threatening letters.”
John Loftus and Mark Aarons, the arch-Zionist authors of The Secret War against the Jews, identify Forrestal as “the principal villain, the man who nearly succeeded in preventing Israel’s birth.” They reveal that “The Zionists had tried unsuccessfully to blackmail Forrestal with tape recordings of his own deals with the Nazis” (before the war, Forrestal had been a partner of Clarence Dillon, the Jewish founder of the banking firm Dillon, Read, and Co.), but they believe that Zionist harassment at least succeeded in making him insane: “His paranoia convinced him that his every word was bugged. / To his many critics, it seemed that James Forrestal’s anti-Jewish obsession had finally conquered him.”[8]

How convenient to claim that anti-Semitism may lead to suicide. When the Zionist mafia wishes you dead, fearing for your life is not a sign of mental illness, but rather of sound judgment.

Forrestal’s behavior at Bethesda shows nothing abnormal for a man locked up in the psychiatric division of a military hospital, on the 16th floor, for reasons he feared were not strictly medical.
Forrestal was even denied visits by those dearest to him. His brother Henry had tried several times to visit him, but had been rebuffed by Dr. Raines. The hospital authorities relented only after Henry threatened legal action. Forrestal was also denied the visit of his friend the Catholic priest, Monsignor Maurice Sheehy. Sheehy wrote in The Catholic Digest, January 1951, that, “The day he was admitted to the hospital, Forrestal told Dr. Raines he wished to see me,” but that Dr. Raines told him “that Jim was so confused I should wait some days before seeing him.” Raines turned away Father Sheehy on six occasions.

...There is an obvious lack of interest from the Willcutts Board regarding all elements that point to murder rather than to suicide. The nurse who first entered Forrestal’s room after his death testified that there was broken glass on his bed. But the room must have been laundered before the crime scene photographs were taken, because they show the bed with nothing but a bare mattress, while another picture shows broken glass on the carpet at the foot of his bed (photos available on Mark Hunter’s site). The Willcutts Board had no interest in finding the origin of the broken glass, nor the reason it was removed from the bed.

They also failed to ask the personnel or themselves any relevant questions about the gown sash tied around Forrestal’s neck. Hoopes and Brinkley later speculated that Forrestal tied the sash to a radiator beneath the window, but that his knot “gave way.” That is contradicted by hospitalman William Eliades, who found the body of Forrestal with the sash (cord) around his neck, and declared to the Willcutts Review Board: “I looked to see whether he had tried to hang himself and whether a piece of cord had broken off. It was still in one piece except it was tied around his neck.”

But the most compelling proof that Forrestal’s death has been disguised as a suicide is the poem allegedly copied by Forrestal. Among the exhibits obtained by Martin alongside the Willcutts report is a copy of the memo sheet with the transcription of the poem (here). A comparison with any handwritten note by Forrestal makes it plain that it was not copied by Forrestal (both can be found on Mark Hunter’s webpage).

Below is first a sample of Forrestal’s handwriting followed by the note he supposedly wrote before jumping out the window and found in his hospital room:

Image
Image

Image

Full article can be read here: https://www.unz.com/article/fifteen-yea ... forrestal/
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9373
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: JFK, ISRAEL, MOSSAD, CIA

Post by been-there »

If anyone else is getting bored of the quite mad back-and-forth beween the forum troll and his feeders, repeating the exact same viewpoints ad nauseum, then check this out.

It is yet more evidence — documented, referenced, made available and verifiable — revealing how corrupt, deceitful and well, ...evil the American system is and has been. The level of deceit and deliberate misinformation to the public and intentional mind-manipulation into believing calculated falsehoods I think is extremely relevant to the subject matter of this forum.

This is an interview with the author of twenty years of research into the misleadingly named 'Manson murders' case.

In it he goes into how the MK Ultra programme was connected to the Manson case as well as the JFK and RFK assassinations.

At 1:30:07 he talks about Jack Ruby and the nefarious activities of his psychiatrist Dr. Louis Jolyon West who was a leading participant in the MKUltra programme.

been-there wrote:
Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:54 am
.
Adolf Ira Botnick (August 17, 1924 – October 8, 1995) was a Jewish Civil Rights activist. Botnick was Head of the New Orleans office of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of B'nai B'rith, an intelligence and propaganda arm for Israel's Mossad.

Botnick was a close associate of New Orleans-based CIA operative Guy Banister who helped create Lee Harvey Oswald's pre-assassination profile as a "pro-Castro" agitator.

Evidence suggests Banister's manipulation of Oswald may have been carried out under the guise of an ADL "fact- finding" operation. (See Chapter 15 and Appendix Three of Piper's book 'Final judgement').

. . . . .

James Jesus Angleton was the CIA's long-time chief of counterintelligence, he was also the CIA's primary high-level conspirator in the murder of President Kennedy and the subsequent cover-up.
Angleton had been co-opted by and was totally loyal to the Israeli Mossad. He played a major role in the effort to frame Lee Harvey Oswald. Final Judgment was the first study of the JFK assassination to delve into Angleton's role in the conspiracy. (See Chapter 8, Chapter 9, and Chapter 16)

. . . . . . .

Israel — as much as the Mafia or the CIA, for example — stood to benefit greatly from the death of America's 35th president, and did. JFK's assassination set the stage for Israel to become a major power.

Research into the Kennedy assassination is most difficult, if only because the literature is so immense, the web so tangled, and the surfeit of theories and potential conspirators so seemingly unending. What's more, some assassination researchers have latched onto their own unique theories and, as a consequence, have failed to look elsewhere — in the direction of Israel, for example. With all of this in mind, let us proceed on the basis that there are certain areas of agreement.

GENERALLY ACCEPTED CONCLUSIONS
Our final judgment — outlined in these pages — rests on a foundation composed of the following generally accepted conclusions about the nature of the JFK assassination conspiracy:

• That there was a conspiracy to kill John F. Kennedy;

• That the conspiracy itself involved elements of the U.S. intelligence community, the CIA in particular;

• That Organised Crime figures played a major part in the conspiracy;

• That anti-Castro Cubans were actively participating in the conspiracy, at the urging of and/or manipulation by the CIA and elements of Organised Crime;

• That somehow Lee Harvey Oswald (wittingly or unwittingly) was brought into the conspiracy and that the conspirators planted false evidence to link Oswald with Fidel Castro and the Soviets;

• That Oswald was involved in some manner of U.S. intelligence activity, even if he was unaware those activities were sponsored or manipulated by some element of the U.S. intelligence community.

• That Jack Ruby was either an active participant in the assassination conspiracy itself or was used in some fashion to manipulate Oswald prior to the assassination of JFK;

• That Ruby was actively involved in organised crime activities and that he was, as a consequence of that involvement, also linked with organised crime activities that operated in conjunction (or ran parallel) with U.S. intelligence community activities.

• That the Central Intelligence Agency was cognizant of the activities of both Oswald and Ruby and certainly manipulated both;

• That Oswald was executed by Jack Ruby for the purpose of silencing Oswald forever;

• That a major cover-up of the JFK assassination conspiracy was undertaken following the events in Dallas;

• That the cover-up involved elements of the federal government (including the CIA);

• That the Warren Commission and the House Assassinations Committee were deliberate participants in the cover-up;

• That the cover-up conspiracy was conducted for a wide variety of motivations —both ostensibly "patriotic" and otherwise — including, but not limited to:
a) burying intelligence community connections to the assassination conspiracy;
b) protecting Organised Crime elements involved;
c) preventing hostilities between the United States and foreign nations (whether it be the Soviet Union or Castro's Cuba); and
d) resolving questions about the assassination in the public's mind, both here and abroad.

• That the Controlled Media actively encouraged and/or participated in the cover-up due to its links to the CIA, the intelligence community in general, and Organised Crime.

This is the basis upon which the research for this volume was undertaken. Upon this foundation Final Judgment ties together all of the facts and shows how the State of Israel and its spy agency, the Mossad, collaborated with not only the CIA but also key elements in Organised Crime and in the anti-Castro Cuban community in order to orchestrate the assassination of John F. Kennedy and the cover-up.

————
All the above taken from Michael Collns Piper's book ' Final judgement'
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

Daniel
Posts: 147
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2017 4:38 am
Contact:

Re: JFK, ISRAEL, MOSSAD, CIA

Post by Daniel »

been-there, have you read Carlos Porter's page about the JFK assassination?

https://www.cwporter.com/letter41.htm

He holds to the establishment line, which I found credible when I read it some time ago. He also doesn't have much good to say about Piper.

He also talks a bit about the assassination in the comments section at the Darkmoon site:

https://www.darkmoon.me/2017/jfk-files- ... ssination/

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9373
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: JFK, ISRAEL, MOSSAD, CIA

Post by been-there »

Daniel wrote:
Mon Apr 20, 2020 5:03 pm
been-there, have you read Carlos Porter's page about the JFK assassination?

https://www.cwporter.com/letter41.htm

He holds to the establishment line, which I found credible when I read it some time ago. He also doesn't have much good to say about Piper.

He also talks a bit about the assassination in the comments section at the Darkmoon site:

https://www.darkmoon.me/2017/jfk-files- ... ssination/
No. I didn't know he had even written about it. I'll check it out. Thanks. :)

Did you see this post of mine. I think it might be relevant here.

Here is an excerpt...
Anyone who believes they know with certainty what happened during WW2, the Aktion Reinhardt policy and the Final Solution of the Jewish Question can be fairly described as a true-believer.
All this happened during what is called — when it suits — 'the fog of war'.
So whether you believe six million Jewish people were deliberately exterminated principally in gas chambers or whether you believe no-one was ever gassed, I believe your certainty is a self-delusion.
I.e. delusions of certainty apply to both 'believers' and 'deniers'.

To understand what went on at the time — AND what is going on NOW in the ongoing debate — we first have to understand and factor in our human nature.
Humans are meaning-making machines. We don't do well with confusion. So we look for patterns and 'meanings'. We create 'certainties'. That's how we can see shapes in clouds and constellations in dots of light in the night sky...
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9373
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: JFK, ISRAEL, MOSSAD, CIA

Post by been-there »

Daniel wrote:
Mon Apr 20, 2020 5:03 pm
been-there, have you read Carlos Porter's page about the JFK assassination?
https://www.cwporter.com/letter41.htm

He holds to the establishment line, which I found credible when I read it some time ago. He also doesn't have much good to say about Piper.
Ok. I've now had a quick look. I was shocked at — what in my opinion — is his obvious misunderstanding of the issues, his self-delusional bravado of certainty and his illogical arguments.

E.g. this:
Carlos Porter wrote:To me, the JFK conspiracy theorists are irrational and illogical. Plus, they lie. For example, for 45 years they've been saying, how could “one bullet cause 7 wounds”? First, they cannot count straight, and second, they count every through-and-through bullet wound as TWO WOUNDS. That is dishonest.
It isn't dishonest. An entry wound is one wound. An exit wound IS another different wound. So that IS 'two' wounds. There is nothing dishonest about that. One bullet can be expected to make two wounds on one person. It can even be expected to make four wounds if it's trajectory passes through two individuals situated close together.
An entry back and exit throat wound on JFK = 2 wounds.
An entry back and exit chest wound on Connally = 2 wounds.
An entry and exit wrist wound on Connaly = 2 wounds.
A final thigh wound on Connally where it remained embedded = 1 wound.
Total SEVEN wounds.

If Porter can't even understand such a simple arithmetical point like this — and has to resort to justify his ignorance by calling anyone who disagrees a liar — then he has no credibility in my eyes.

It was Warren Commission whitewasher Arlen Specter who posited the explanation that one bullet (‘CE 399’) caused all the wounds to the Connally and the non-fatal wounds to Kennedy.
(Specter is also mentioned in that videoed interview of Tom O'Neill). They HAD to come up with this ludicrous theory, to explain all the wounds while allowing for the one bullet that missed altogether and hit the kerb by the underpass.
Such a trajectory would have hit both men in less than 1/100th of a second. Even the tampered Zapruder film, PLUS Jackie Kennedy's and Connally's testimony, all refute that.


And then this:
Carlos Porter wrote:For 45 years, they've been talking about the "pristine bullet", which isn't pristine at all, it's smashed completely flat on one side, flatter than you could smash it with a hammer, the sign of a tremendous impact. Why don't they ever show the end-on view of it? For 45 years I never saw an honest picture of it. Why not?
ImageImage

A bullet that caused all the injuries SHOULD NOT and could not look like this. It damaged Kennedy's first thoracic vertebra and if it then hit Connally completely destroyed 127 millimetres of his fifth right rib bone, then struck Connally's right hand solid-gold "Mexican peso" cufflink (which mysteriously/conveniently disappeared), before breaking his right radius wrist bone, depositing metal fragments (some of the metal fragments remained in him for the rest of his life) finally piercing his thigh.
The single bullet theory /'conclusion' is preposterous.
Daniel wrote:
Mon Apr 20, 2020 5:03 pm
He also talks a bit about the assassination in the comments section at the Darkmoon site:
https://www.darkmoon.me/2017/jfk-files- ... ssination/
I no longer feel interested to even visit. His credibility has diminished greatly in my eyes. So thanks for this. Much appreciated, Daniel.
I will regard his arguments for holocaust issues much more critically from now on.
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9373
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: JFK, ISRAEL, MOSSAD, CIA

Post by been-there »

Part 1 of 2

For those who have never delved into the Kennedy assassination but have interest in the matter, let me set forth just a few of the reasons that the circumstantial evidence points to a... state regime-change operation. Then, at the end of this article, I’ll point out some books and videos for those who wish to explore the matter more deeply.

I start out with a basic thesis: Lee Harvey Oswaldwas an intelligence agent for the U.S. deep state. Now, that thesis undoubtedly shocks people who have always believed in the lone-nut theory of the assassination. They just cannot imagine that Oswald could have really been working for the U.S. government at the time of the assassination.

Yet, when one examines the evidence in the case objectively, the lone-nut theory doesn’t make any sense. The only thesis that is consistent with the evidence and, well, common sense, is that Oswald was a U.S. intelligence agent.

Ask yourself: How many communist Marines have you ever encountered or even heard of? My hunch is none. Not one single communist Marine. Why would a communist join the Marines? Communists hate the U.S. Marine Corps. In fact, the U.S. Marine Corps hates communists. It kills communists. It tortures them. It invades communist countries. It bombs them. It destroys them.

What are the chances that the Marine Corps would permit an openly avowed communist to serve in its ranks? None! There is no such chance. And yet, here was Oswald, whose Marine friends were calling “Oswaldovitch,” being assigned to the Atsugi naval base in Japan, where the U.S. Air Force was basing its top-secret U-2 spy plane, one that it was using to secretly fly over the Soviet Union. Why would the Navy and the Air Force permit a self-avowed communist even near the U-2? Does that make any sense?

While Oswald was serving in the Marine Corps, he became fluent in the Russian language. How is that possible? How many people have you known who have become fluent in a foreign language all on their own, especially when they have a full-time job? Even if they are able to study a foreign language from books, they have to practice conversing with people in that language to become proficient in speaking it. How did Oswald do that? There is but one reasonable possibility: Language lessons provided by U.S. military-suppled tutors.

After leaving the Marine Corps, Oswald traveled to the Soviet Union, walked into the U.S. embassy, renounced his citizenship, and stated that he intended to give any secrets he learned while serving in the military to the Soviet Union. Later, when he stated his desire to return to the United States, with a wife with family connections to Soviet intelligence, Oswald was given the red-carpet treatment on his return. No grand jury summons. No grand-jury indictment. No FBI interrogation. No congressional summons to testify.

Remember: this was at the height of the Cold War, when the U.S. national-security establishment was telling Americans that there was a worldwide communist conspiracy based in Moscow that was hell-bent on taking over the United States and the rest of the world. The U.S. had gone to war in Korea because of the supposed communist threat. They would do the same in Vietnam. They would target Cuba and Fidel Castro with invasion and assassination. They would pull off regime-change operations on both sides of the Kennedy assassination: Iran (1953), Guatemala (1954), Cuba (1960s), Congo (1963), and Chile (1973).

During the 1950s, they were targeting any American who had had any connections to communism. They were subpoenaing people to testify before Congress as to whether they had ever been members of the Communist Party. They were destroying people’s reputations and costing them their jobs. Remember the case of Dalton Trumbo and other Hollywood writers who were criminally prosecuted and incarcerated. Recall the Hollywood blacklist. Recall the Rosenbergs, whom they executed for giving national-security state secrets to the Soviets. Think about Jane Fonda.

Indeed, if you want a modern-day version of how the U.S. national-security state treats suspected traitors and betrayers of its secrets, reflect on Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, and Chelsea Manning. That’s how we expect national-security state officials to behave toward those they consider traitors and betrayers of U.S. secrets.

Not so with Oswald. With him, we have what amounts to two separate parallel universes. One universe involves all the Cold War hoopla against communists. Another one is the one in which Oswald is sauntering across the world stage as one of America’s biggest self-proclaimed communists — a U.S. Marine communist — who isn’t touched by some congressional investigative committee, some federal grand jury, or some FBI agent. How is that possible?

Later, when Oswald ended up in Dallas, his friends were right-wingers, not left-wingers. He even got job at a photographic facility that developed top-secret photographs for the U.S. government. How is that possible? Later, when he ended up in New Orleans, he got hired by a private company that was owned by a fierce anti-communist right-winger. Why would he hire a supposed communist who supposedly had betrayed America by supposedly joining up with America’s avowed communist enemy, the Soviet Union, and to whom he had supposedly given U.S. national-security state secrets, just like Julian and Ethel Rosenberg had?

By Jacob G. Hornberger

The Future of Freedom Foundation, 22nd June 2020


https://www.fff.org/2020/06/22/fear-in- ... rt-1-of-2/
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 6 guests