It is currently Thu Apr 24, 2014 9:21 am

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 46 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Who killed JFK
PostPosted: Fri Jun 17, 2005 6:26 pm 
Offline
Senior Member
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 1:31 pm
Posts: 222
Location: San Diego, Ca
Who killed JFK


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 17, 2005 7:43 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 6:43 am
Posts: 1015
my thoughts from books that i have read , the jfk killing points to carlos marcello and some cia officials tied into the mafia.
also their is theories about higher up politicians were pissed off at jfk over withdrawing from the vietnam war.

hey i guess business was just too good.

_________________
I believe that God has planted in every heart the desire to live in freedom.
George W. Bush
DESTROY THE QURAN OR BE DESTROYED BY IT


Last edited by buckshot on Sun Jun 19, 2005 10:30 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 17, 2005 7:44 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 6:43 am
Posts: 1015
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/context1.htm

_________________
I believe that God has planted in every heart the desire to live in freedom.
George W. Bush
DESTROY THE QURAN OR BE DESTROYED BY IT


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 17, 2005 7:46 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 6:43 am
Posts: 1015
oh and by the way i feel pretty confident that Oswald was a scape goat.

Image

_________________
I believe that God has planted in every heart the desire to live in freedom.
George W. Bush
DESTROY THE QURAN OR BE DESTROYED BY IT


Last edited by buckshot on Wed Jun 22, 2005 4:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 17, 2005 7:47 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 6:43 am
Posts: 1015
http://www.law.uga.edu/academics/profil ... _8mob.html

_________________
I believe that God has planted in every heart the desire to live in freedom.
George W. Bush
DESTROY THE QURAN OR BE DESTROYED BY IT


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 5:29 am 
Offline
Involved
Involved

Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 4:27 am
Posts: 17
who killed JFK?

wild guess here

Oswald maybe?

:wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Maybe not
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 10:03 am 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2004 4:32 pm
Posts: 279
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Lew wrote:
who killed JFK?

wild guess here

Oswald maybe?

:wink:


Nice guess...but he would have had to be one hell of a shot. Better than anyone living then and since. To date nobody has been able to recreate his alleged shooting.

We might have found out if Jack Ruby was given the chance to speak as he requested. They would not grant him protection. Hmmm...I wonder why?

_________________
Peace,
Jesse - Editor, TvNewsLies.org
http://tvnewslies.org


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 22, 2005 7:29 am 
Offline
Senior Member
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 8:05 am
Posts: 113
Location: Old Europe
Oswald maybe ? LOL Now that's one seriously uninformed answer there Lew. You obvioulsy have not gatherred all of the available facts on the JFK assasination. Why bother replying to the question when all you can deliver is a reflection of the shit you've been fed by MSM all your life ?

The magic bullet out of Oswald's rifle............explained at this site http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/sbt.htm .

My answer to Jesse's question = the ST with utilization of the CIA:

NOTE for today's CIA reading this : I'm not referring to you, but to the agents involved then and there. Most likely a select few traitors who were part of the ST.

Kennedy's assasination was the beginning of the plight we now find ourselves in. It was a hostile takeover. Don't know who the ST is ? If you could read more than just a punch line.....well try this http://johnmccarthy90066.tripod.com/id20.html . Now don't come back ranting and raving about how you've been personally attacked by moi because I'm not attacking you personally....I'm not even attacking your ignorance. Ignorance of the facts. Don't come back to post another silly reply to this thread BEFORE you've read more than just the punch line. All the info you need is out there. It certainly won't do you any good if you continue to ignore it.

_________________
Music & More


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 22, 2005 10:03 am 
Offline
Deal With It!
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 4:57 pm
Posts: 413
Location: Land of Lincoln
Lew wrote:
who killed JFK?

wild guess here

Oswald maybe?

:wink:


Bwahahahahaha...

Is Lew going to tell us that the moon's made of cheese next?

_________________
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."
--John Kenneth Galbraith


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 4:49 pm 
Offline
Involved
Involved

Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 4:27 am
Posts: 17
Read Posner's book Case closed..then tell me about the "magic bullet"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 5:20 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 11:46 pm
Posts: 14442
Location: NC
I've read Posner's book, and it's nothing compared to the videos/DVD entitled "The Men Who Killed Kennedy" available right here at TVNL.

Gerald Posner isn't a scholar, and all he does is parrot the Warren Report:

Quote:
On Gerald Posner
by Harrison E. Livingstone


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is a tough thing being pitted against the likes of Gerald Posner, as I was on NBC's "Today Show" the morning of September 30, 1998. America has come to a sad crossroads when the best that can be put into the lists for the government in the John F. Kennedy assassination conspiracy controversy are two government flacks: Posner and Max Holland. Both parrot the Warren Commission line at the cost of truth and scholarship. Posner is proclaimed a scholar when all he has to show for it are lies, half truths and distortions.

It is Posner, the arch fraud in America today, although he is not alone, who is joined by so many others on this uneven playing field, (even some in the JFK assassination research community who greatly misinform), who now would hope to lead the defense for the government team. Random House, like Time and Newsweek, provide their tremendous power for these liars to proceed. My seventh chapter in Killing Kennedy (1995) exposes Posner, with the help of many critics' thought and analysis, for all time as a fake.

Yet we must suffer mountains of bull manure and battle his lies. Posner's personal vendetta against Robert Kennedy and the Kennedy family shows with nearly every utterance. Speaking of the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB), he ignores the vastly important secret investigation conducted among the autopsy and photographic witnesses and writes: "Their most important contribution may be documents that shed light on the role of Bobby Kennedy after the assassination ... RFK emerges as someone intent on protecting his brother's reputation and hiding any possible connection to the operations against Castro. But Robert Kennedy's defensiveness had enormous unintended consequences: he may have inadvertently been responsible for many key questions raised by conspiracy buffs over the decades." (Newsweek, October 12, 1998) Posner begins the subtle process of melding assassination plots against Castro with operations against Castro's regime. These are two different animals.

Here we have the spectacle of "conspiracy scholar" Gerald Posner working the ultimate con. We "buffs" are dismissed with a label, like mental patients, and the immense problems with the autopsy and its photographs and X-rays are blamed on Robert Kennedy. What he cannot explain and does not bother to address is why the wounds are not in the same place in the photos as they were described in the autopsy and by witnesses. Along with the doctors, he dismisses the FBI men as well. We are about to get the slickest pitch from the seediest of snake oil salesmen to ever work this country.

Comment: Well, at least until the Bushies came along.

One of my four books on the case, High Treason, (just republished with a massive addendum on the ARRB's secret investigation) has an extensive discussion of the assassination plots against Castro from pp 267 to 271. The Kennedys were deadly enemies of the Mob and the Mob was the primary instrument in the plots. Every effort was made to keep the ongoing plots from the Kennedys. Allen Dulles, who had been the Director of the CIA whom Kennedy had fired in no uncertain terms, and who unaccountably was one of the Warren Commissioners when Kennedy was assassinated, approved the plots, along with his Deputy Director, General Charles Cabell, the brother of the Mayor of Dallas (who greatly hated Kennedy), so how could anyone suppose for a moment that he did not tell his fellow commissioners about them?

Posner continues with his charade: "It started immediately. New records reveal the extent to which Bobby, Jacqueline and Kennedy aides pressed the autopsy doctors to speed their work. The autopsy itself was not thorough, leading to significant errors that were later seized upon by conspiracy enthusiasts. Moreover, the Kennedys were insistent that nothing be made public--even in death--of the doctors' discovery that the president did indeed suffer from Addison's disease, a rare chronic illness." In fact, the Kennedys authorized a complete autopsy which took several hours to perform.

There is much wrong with this kind of twisted propaganda exercise. Everybody in the countIy, or at least in the medical community and most of the Washington press corps knew that JFK had Addison's disease. By the time Posner gets done mentioning it, one would think of the problem as some sort of terrible social disease, or like AIDS perhaps, certainly not a condition which caused little or no trouble at all to the President. Since JFK died, the political warfare included the destruction of his image in the minds of the public for all that he gave us of his self and leadership, all that was wonderful about him and that golden time in our history, in spite of the nation's problems. The name of the game is to destroy his reputation--to indulge in the worst kind of character assassination so that people will not care about what happened to him.

We are dealing with propaganda warfare here, the same sort of thing intelligence agencies prepare for attack in foreign nations, and which political parties do to each other. Only the way Posner plays it is to take no prisoners. He is the biggest liar and fraud in many years in this nation.

Comment: Again, until the Bushies came along.

Who is paying Posner to say these things? What is at stake for him? He is a Random House "house" writer, meaning as long as they can count on him supporting the establishment line in this and the Martin Luther King case, he eats.

Now we come to his more direct attempt to absolutely distort the truth. "The review board located a new witness who suggested there might have been a second set of photos of JFK's corpse, something conspiracists (Author's note, this is not a word) have suggested might prove there was a second gunman. But the set the witness helped develop had "no blood or opening cavities" and the wounds were much smaller than those evident in the official photos. This suggests that the Kennedys merely wanted sanitized images for possible public release."

There has been no wilder theory put forward since the Warren Report in this country. It is ridiculous to suppose that the Kennedys would have released any sanitized photos of the body, since they knew there was a conspiracy. And why would the Kennedy's move the wounds, as has happened with the official pictures Saundra Spencer the Navy tech who processed and developed the autopsy photographs) does not recognize. Above all, how could the Kennedys possibly influence the United States Navy or the Secret Service (Posner does not explain who could have done this) to falsify photographs in a criminal investigation? They were certainly unable to prevent a complete autopsy from being performed. All agree that the autopsy was in fact nearly complete. The only thing that was not done was that the organs of the neck were not removed, because at the time there was no reason to. The doctors--at least officially--did not know until the next day (too late) that JFK had been shot in the throat.

One of Posner's colossal lies is that the autopsy was incomplete and that it was limited by the Kennedys. A lot of us were suckered by this for a long time.

Now comes another major lie: "The Review Board obtained the first testimony proving that Kennedy's military physician, Admiral George Burkley left Bethesda carrying the president's brain in a bucket. He said he was going to 'deliver it to Robert Kennedy.' JFK's brain has never been found, and was presumably later interred with the President at Arlington." The House Assassinations Committee investigated this and found that the brain was never interred at Arlington (7 HSCA 32), and again, Posner seriously confuses the issue when he doesn't tell us when Burkley removed the brain. The man does not do his homework.

It is true that there was a container which was listed as containing a brain which was kept at the National Archives in a trunk under the control of the President's secretary, Eveyln Lincoln, for several years until returned to the Kennedy family. It's also clear from the investigation conducted by the HSCA that the brain was not interred with the body in November, 1963 (7 HSCA 23-4) or later when the permanent grave was completed. "The pathologists retained various sections of organs as well as the entire brain after the autopsy for subsequent microscopic examination. . . the pathologists placed the brain in a formaldehyde solution in a stainless steel bucket and then deposited this in the closet of Admiral Galloway. . . Dr. Burkley supported this information by informing the committee that he directed the 'fixation and retention of the brain for future study.'. . . In an affidavit and interview with Dr. Burkley, he informed the committee that shortly after this supplemental examination of the organs and brain, he directed the Bethesda Naval Hospital to transfer all the physical autopsy material in its possession to Bouck at the Executive Office Building. Dr. Burkley stated further that Captain Stover gave him the brain in a white granite or stainless steel bucket and that he personally transferred it to the White House where it was placed in a locked Secret Service file cabinet (7 HSCA 25)."

Therefore, the story that Gerald Posner tells is true insofar as Kennedy's doctor carrying the bucket out of Bethesda to the White House, but it is the date that is important because the transfer happened after the supplemental examination of the brain described along with the autopsy report itself.


The real question is, was it really President Kennedy's brain at that supplemental examination after the body was buried, or had the brain already been switched? The pathologists may have tried to alert us to this when they listed a brain weighing 1500 grams, considerably more than an average male brain, not taking into account that nearly one half of the brain was left on the street in Dallas and that the autopsy photographer, Thomas Stringer, told the Board that the brain in the autopsy pictures was not JFK's brain (interview with John T. Stringer, ARRB, July 16, 1996, pp. 153, 216-218, 221). One of the FBI men at the autopsy, Francis X. O'Neill also stated that it was not Stringer's brain (ARRB interview, September 12, 1997, pp 164-166). In fact, after the two experienced retired FBI criminal investigators finished mauling the alleged autopsy photographs in the National Archives, there was not much left of the government's position.

My point is that Gerald Posner simply twists, distorts, makes up or lies when it comes to evidence.

"Indeed, family feeling, not official misconduct, seems to be a more plausible explanation for the questions that surround Dallas." Posner then writes that just after the autopsy the Kennedys asked many of those present to promise not to talk about the procedure for 25 years. Did this, or indeed, could this have ever happened? "Conspiracy buffs pointed to that wall of silence as proof of a continuing cover-up, when in fact the doctors and staff were merely adhering to the wishes of the family." A CBS memorandum written by Bob Richter of 10 January 1967 relates long discussions between the chief pathologist and Jim Snyder about the autopsy. Many people in Washington were aware of statements made by those at the autopsy about events there. It was the Navy that forbade them to talk about the autopsy, not the Kennedys. So much for Navy orders. Various versions of the autopsy pictures were all over Washington, in addition.

What we get here is the distinct possibility that Gerald Posner is an agent of the conspiracy that continues to cover up the JFK case.

"Beyond the autopsy, Bobby may have worried that the Warren Commission might stumble onto the government's plots to kill Castro. One thing is clear: Bobby did not want the Warren Commission investigating Cuba." Awfully familiar is this "Bobby" stuff, and shows once again the hand of a propagandist dehumanizing his target through lack of respect. Throughout Posner's intense propaganda assault in this and other cases, he dehumanizes us, along with the Kennedys--whom he clearly hates.

One of his claims in the Newsweek article was to quote hearsay evidence from former CIA director Richard Helms. He quotes Henry Kissinger as saying in 1975 that "Helms said all these stories (about Cuba and the Kennedys) are just the tip of the iceberg. If they come out, blood will flow. For example, Robert Kennedy personally managed the operation on the assassination of Castro."

This alleged discussion occurred during Gerald Ford's brief tenure as President after Richard Nixon resigned. Extensive investigation by the Senate Intelligence Committee in 1974-5 of the question of whether or not either Kennedy was involved in the assassination plots against Castro strongly showed that thy could nol have been, that they were not disposed in any way by reason of deep religious conviction and ethics to murder any foreign leader and in fact did all in their power to prevent the CIA or anyone else from engaging in death plots against Castro or any other leader (Senate Intelligence Committee Report on Foreign Assassination Plots p. 133; 108-124; 84, 132, 102-3). Richard Helms had adequate opportunity to tell this story to the Senate, but instead he never mentioned it. He did not dare. Gerald Ford was on the Warren Commission and helped cover up the assassination in that capacity. He, like other Republicans and his predecessor, Richard Nixon, who hated John Kennedy, were intent on destroying not only Kennedy but his memory and standing in the minds of the public. Helms, in addition, was a well known liar, as so many working for the CIA were required to lie as a matter of course.

The plain fact is that the assassination was political and a domestic conspiracy. One result is that the evidence and the position people often take on it is therefore politicized. After two hundred years, the nation has come full circle to where it began with the main political parties attempting to utterly destroy each other.

"What it (the Review Board) actually says that Bobby Kennedy was pushing the autopsy doctors to complete this work as fast as they could. They were petrified that the doctors would discover that President Kennedy had Addison's disease, a potentially fatal disease, and they would make it public. They hid things up in the autopsy. . . We now understand better ever than why. The statement that the autopsy materials are false is absolutely false. He can say it all the way to Sunday and it's not going to make it true."

One might put aside for the moment the psychological aberrations revealed by his strange figures of speech and glib expressions such as in his statement on the same show that "The autopsy pictures have been tested every way to Sunday and they're (not faked). The Board did not comment or draw conclusions on the question of authenticity of the evidence or lack of it. What they did do was to present the FBI men at the autopsy and others basically rejecting the offlcial evidence in the Archives and implying that it is clearly retouched or "doctored" In addition, a major amount of evidence was presented for the first time that there were in fact entirely different autopsy photos. Why?

"I do think that reasonable thinking people who want to approach this case and look at the credible evidence can realize what likely happened in Dallas 35 years ago: That one person for his own motivation killed the President." In fact, the Board was investigating the case I presented for faked in evidence in four major books, two of them best sellers. I was corroborated by a mountain of evidence showing that those photographs in the National Archives cannot possibly be accurate and that they show that the wounds were moved in order to fool people. Who might they be? Start with Earl Warren, who was shown the fake pictures.

Posner's attempt to shift the weight for the disparity in the pictures to Robert Kennedy and claim that the survivors tried to sanitize the pictures is a lie. At the same time he claims that they have been tested "Every way to Sunday" and are therefore authentic does not mean they can possibly be authentic when ever single witness to the wounds, including Jacqueline Kennedy, the best witness of all, stated clearly that the wounds are not in the right places.

President Kennedy directed as follows: "We cannot, as a free nation, compete with our adversaries in tactics of terror (and) assassination." And in a cable to the U.S. consul, President Kennedy wrote that the "U.S. as a matter of policy cannot condone assassination." It is impossible to suppose that his brother Robert then would have proceeded with such a death plot against Castro in violation of the President's thinking, which in fact was the same as his own. The brothers were indeed joined at the hip.

As an apologist for the long discredited Warren Commission's theory about the assassination, Posner remains a throwback on the junk heap of history, not withstanding his effectiveness as a master propagandist. On the NBC "Today Show" with me, he claimed that "I said Oswald did it alone. Livingstone said maybe that's right. What people like Livingstone say is, guess what, that's right." I never agreed with this nor could I. Once again we have him both dehumanizing me and having me say things I did not say. He stakes out a position in the biggest lie there ever was, when the truth is most of the men on the Warren Commission either believed that there was a second gunman or that the "magic bullet theory" was impossible. Even Gerald Ford admitted to the Board last year that he changed the language of the Warren Report and moved the bullet entry into the President's back some six inches up to the neck to make it work and also hit John Connally.

His punch line, as published at the end of his Newsweek article (12 October 1998) is that "The newly released documents highlight that the Kennedy's interference over parts of the investigation might have served their own personal interests in the short term, but were a tremendous disservice to history in the long run. The files released by the review board prove there was indeed a cover-up, but not of the assassination." Deja vu, as we went through this same litany with Posner and Newsweek when his abominable book came out several years ago. As we all know, the case was promptly re-opened by the Assassination Records Review Board, certainly not because of anything he wrote, but because of my presentation of the evidence, and the efforts of many others who came to question the authenticity of the autopsy materials.

I got a kick out of reading his line about a "tremendous disservice to history in the long run. . ." because he flubbed this line in quoting the entire statement on the "Today Show." In other words, he must have a speech writer and must responses are prepared for him, along with a preplanned attack on the conspiracy "buffs" or "enthusiasts." It is clear that the intent was to dehumanize us. Even the networks did it when they labeled Jim Lesar and myself as "theorists" and not the "scholar" that part time free lance journalist Max Holland and muck-raker Gerald Posner are
.


Readers can get an extensive summary of the major investigation conducted by the Assassination Records Review Board among the medical and photographic witnesses at the end (p. 403) of the new, 1998 edition of my High Treason, published by Carroll Graf.


* * *
Mr. Livingstone is the author of eight published books, four of them on the assassination of President Kennedy. Two were best sellers, and one of those, High Treason, was republished on September 26 with a new paper detailing the releases of the ARRB spoken of above. His most recent novel, Baltimore, appeared last summer.



Copyright © Year, by Copyright Holder

Link: http://spot.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.ba ... osner.html




AND THERE'S MORE:

Quote:
This letter to the editor appeared in the Federal Bar News & Journal, v.41 (June 1994), p.388.



George Costello's excellent review of Gerald Posner's Case Closed (41 Fed. Bar & News J. 233 (Mar./Apr. 1994)) brought to mind unsettling experiences I've had exploring Posner's work. Posner mentioned, in support of his contention that James Tague was hit by a fragment from the first of three shots, that Tague reported in a 1992 interview that he did not know which of the three shots hit him.1 As recently noted by Harold Weisberg in his new book, Case Open,2 however, Tague told the Warren Commision that he was not hit by a fragment from the first shot. I called Tague on April 30, 1994, and he told me the same thing he told the Warren Commission. Thus, Tague not only flatly contradicts Posner's reconstruction of the shooting, he reveals that Posner misrepresented Tague's views, which have been consistent over three decades. Moreover, Tague also told me that he has never spoken with Posner, though the implication of three references in Case Closed is that Posner did speak with him on two successive days.3

Posner dismissed Rose Cheramie's remarkable clairvoyance that President Kennedy was to be killed in Dallas by claiming that the witness to Cheramie's statements, Dr. Victor Weiss, reported that Cheramie only mentioned this after Oswald's death. This is flatly untrue, which Posner must know from the work of the 1978 House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) which reported that, according to Dr. Weiss, "Dr. Bowers allegedly told Weiss that the patient, Rose Cheramie, had stated before the assassination that President Kennedy was going to be killed. . . 4Moreover, Posner certainly knowingly neglected to mention another unassailable, HCSA-cited witness, Louisiana state police lieutenant Francis Fruge. He reported Cheramie made the prediction directly to him two days before Kennedy's murder. 5

Posner cited the testimony of Renatus Hartogs, the psychiatrist who examined Oswald as a teenage truant, arguing that Hartog's findings suggested a violent potential. 4The Warren Commission dismissed Hartogs' testimony when an examination of his original report revealed the opposite conclusion. In fact, the commission concluded, "[c]ontrary to reports that appeared after the assassination, the psychiatric examination did not indicate that Lee Oswald was a potential assassin, potentially dangerous, that his 'outlook on life had strongly paranoid overtones,' or that he should be institutionalized." 7

On November 17, 1993, before the House Committee on Government Operations, Posner reported that he had interviewed two of Kennedy's pathologists, James Humes, M.D., and J. Thornton Boswell, M.D.8 Posner testified that they confirmed to him that they had changed their minds about the original location they had given for Kennedy's skull wound. In their 1963 autopsy report, 9 and again in 1992 interviews published in the Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA), both pathologists claimed the bullet entered Kennedy's skull "to the right and just above" the base of the rear of the skull, near the external occipital protuberance. 10 Posner informed the U.S. Congress that the pathologists told him that they had erred-the wound was 10 centimers higher, at the top rear of the skull. On March 30, 1994, I called both Drs. Humes and Boswell. Both physicians told me that they had not changed their minds about Kennedy's wounds at all. They stood by their statements in JAMA, which contradict Posner. Startingly, Dr. Boswell told me that he has never spoken with Posner.

While one is naturally loath to question the good faith of any author, especially one nominated for the Pulitzer Prize, Posner seems to be begging even Warren Commission loyalists to question his
.


Link: http://www.assassinationscience.com/aguilar.html


About that "magic bullet?" Go here: http://spot.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.ba ... rone2.html

http://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/Issues_and ... asons.html

Posner Follies: http://www.assassinationweb.com/milam1.htm

Catherine

_________________
Image

"Behind every great fortune lies a great crime."
Honore de Balzac

"Democrats work to help people who need help.
That other party, they work for people who don't need help.
That's all there is to it."

~Harry S. Truman


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2005 8:48 pm 
Offline
Deal With It!
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 4:57 pm
Posts: 413
Location: Land of Lincoln
Catherine wrote:
Gerald Posner isn't a scholar, and all he does is parrot the Warren Report:


The Warren Report set new low standards for whitewash.

Magic Bullet my ass.

Whenever you hear someone say "we need to put this behind us and heal the nation" or something similar, you need to immediately think coverup and point your finger in the direction from whose mouth it came and yell as loudly as you can "Liar"...

_________________
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."
--John Kenneth Galbraith


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 1:58 am 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 11:58 pm
Posts: 866
Location: Planet Usury
Many had a lot to gain by getting rid of The Kennedys.

The CIA, who if Kennedy was out of the way, would remain intact instead of being "scattered to the winds" as Kennedy had threatened;

The Mafia, "Who wanted rid of the Kennedy boys," as they had caused them so much trouble;

The Anti-Castro Cubans, who, helped by former CIA controllers, avenged the Bay of Pigs debacle, and finally,

The Military / Industrial / Economic - Banking complex that stood so very much to gain from the escalating war in Vietnam .. from which Kennedy had announced the U.S. was withdrawing. (More later)

Oh and lets not forget about Lyndon Johnson and his Texas backers who also had so much to gain from the War in Vietnam and all the Power that comes with the presidency.

Still, the question remains - Why?

It wasn't just war profits and / or revenge, President John F. Kennedy, like Lincoln before him, was going to interfere with the progress of the master plan. The total control of the economy, that had taken the internal banking cartel so long to control. Kennedy planned to exterminate the Federal Reserve System, then put the Country back on the Gold standard. In this action, he would put the Country back on a "cash & carry" get away from deficit spending, and eventually eliminate the national debt .. as Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln before him when they did the same to two Rothschild-organized banks. You can check this out for yourself. In 1963, by presidential order of John F. Kennedy - (EO-11 and EO-110), the United States Treasury began printing printing over $4 billion worth of "United States Notes" to replace Federal Reserve Notes. When a sufficient supply of these notes entered circulation, the Federal Reserve Notes ... hence, the The Federal Reserve Board, would have been declared obsolete. This done, the notes printed and issued by the Federal Reserve Board .. would have been removed from circulation as they wore out and would no longer be issued. This, in effect, would end the control of the international investment bankers over the U.S. Government .. and the American People.

What we have today is a system of usury. We the people .. are nothing more then debt slaves to the banks.

The real truth ...

Billions for Bankers – Debts for the People
http://www.doub...g/emry1.html

What is the Mandrake Mechanism?
http://www.bibl...u/jekyll.htm
(Busy - Keep trying)

Slient Weapons
http://www.weal..._Weapons.htm

Educate Yourself
http://www.weal...2educate.htm

_________________
You will know you have spoken the truth when you are angrily denounced; and you will know you have spoken both truly and well when you are visited by the thought police.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 5:28 am 
Offline
Senior Member
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 8:05 am
Posts: 113
Location: Old Europe
from http://www.apfn.org/bush/bush8b.htm the unnoffical Biography of Geroge Bush Sr. ;

snip

"And of course, George Bush during these years was calling for escalation in Vietnam and challenging Kennedy to "muster the courage" to try a second invasion of Cuba."

George Bush ??

snip

"So we are left with the strong suspicion that the "Mr. George Bush of the CIA" referred to by the FBI is our own George Herbert Walker Bush, who, in addition to his possible contact with Lee Harvey Oswald's controller, may thus also join the ranks of the Kennedy assassination cover-up. It makes perfect sense for George Bush to be called in on a matter involving the Cuban community in Miami, since that is a place where George has traditionally had a constituency. George inherited it from his father, Prescott Bush of Jupiter Island, and later passed it on to his own son, Jeb."

_________________
Music & More


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 01, 2005 7:59 am 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 11:46 pm
Posts: 14442
Location: NC
Excellent information, Sir and Jay...if it's sordid enough, you can bet your boots there's a Bush involved. The Bush family is nothing but a crime family...hiding behind a facade of feigned religious piety and good old boy slaps on the backs of the ignorant.

The United States has reached a new political and historical low.

Of course you both know that Scott McClellan is the son of Barr McClellan, who wrote the book Blood, Money, and Power in which McClellan claims Lyndon Johnson was a part of the conspiracy to kill John Kennedy.

Catherine

_________________
Image

"Behind every great fortune lies a great crime."
Honore de Balzac

"Democrats work to help people who need help.
That other party, they work for people who don't need help.
That's all there is to it."

~Harry S. Truman


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 46 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Blue Moon by Trent © 2007
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group