I have to thank you for doing this in this format... even though there seems to be a glitch in this mp3, with Hankey's part repeating... instead of the three of you scrapping it out in interview format. It's hard enough to bear this material and it would've been a train wreck any other way.I too was shocked to hear Hankey defending LBJ that way... and especially the part about him getting on the ticket. It was a shocker at the time. Nobody had the remotest notion that would happen. I think the excuse was that they decided they needed him to win. I was very young, but even I knew that much was bogus.
Hi 99, It's Gary King, I am planning on contacting everyone who comments on this show; and I hope you will participate as well, to declare a winner of the debate. Jim's, LBJ was the pivotal player, Gary King's, Zionist Ideology Agenda or John Hankey's, LBJ wasn't all evil. Cast your vote with a comment to back it up.
Thanks for the entertaining contribution, Gary, but despite my appreciation for not having to hear the three of you bellowing at each other in unison, and getting this opportunity to view it from different angles, I think resorting to the great ancestral debating mode is, and always was, a good way to lose the thread. Formal debating may even have been designed in the first place to keep truth from ever holding the day. In any case, whatever the start of it, it always seems to devolve into testosterone wars where actuality is ignored.Testosterone is good for basic survival mode... and by “basic survival mode” I mean protecting yourself and your own from predators... not for getting to the truth. Some say debating is a good way to channel these basic drives into a civilized frame of reference, but it only ever seems to yield a survival-of-the-cleverest way of driving us ever further away from living truly, from getting to the kernel and proceeding according to it.I came away from this thinking you are losing the truth, reviling the filthy influences of Zionism so much it clouds your vision; John is doing the same thing by defaulting to liberal idealism; and Jim came out the least benighted by his own moral defaults here because, I think, he has enough experience of the world to keep both his revulsion and idealism in check as he goes about his efforts to see into the truth.If he had skipped pointing that out to us the testosterone might have lost its power in this dispute, but, well, it still is more like the truth than not, and ignoring the emotional charge, the bellicosity, you and John don’t seem to be as interested in the truth as you are your own biases. Beware. Try to heed. These are used by psychopaths to keep us from the kind of unity that will bring them down. It’s ancient. We still fall for it.We have no one to blame but ourselves for our abjection in the face of this historic catastrophe. Excusing Obama, and all the rest of our murdering presidents, because they have not wanted their heads blown off... or their families killed... is about as filthy as all the scum capitulating to Zionist influence, AND all the Zionist psychopaths meddling... all the murderers themselves. You can’t do any of that and be a hero.LBJ capitulated, forfeited hero status, took that route to victory, because he hated Jack and Bobby and he was determined to be president. To put it in Joe Roganese, he was gangster. He dominated. It was never about us. It was about him, Lyndon dominating, having more women by accident than the rest of the mere mortals did on purpose. No matter how much good he did, and he did, he was a perfidious monster in service to his narcissism. The best thing I can say for him is he appears to have come to understand the error of his ways and been man enough to call it quits before he strictly had to.That’s being generous. It was probably more just that he could not stand being owned by the psychopaths who used his blind rage, not so he could be top dog, but so THEY could. His balls were being twisted relentlessly through every minute of his tenure as president because he couldn’t see through his rage. because he’d kill behind it. Right here is why debating doesn’t yield truth. It’s about whose balls get twisted off and whose don’t, whose weaknesses are used to make them lose, even when they “win”.I’m trying to say that it doesn’t matter as much that there may have been all kinds of Zionism involved, or that LBJ went on to do some good things for us little guys, the truth, part of which is that LHO was innocent and LBJ was not, needs out once and for all, and we have to take the power that made, and makes, it possible to assassinate America away... from EVERYONE... before the psychopaths go another step.I’ve been screaming this for the past numberless steps and no one has listened yet.
I think it was LBJ who got the biggest shock of all when he didn't get the nomination for the Democratic presidential candidateand that it was given instead to JFK whom LBJ regarded as a political upstart, a nobody, a thief and a usurper. As far as LBJ was concerned, JFK stole the Presidency from him. The Presidency - a prize and a trophy that LBJ considered to be his as a birth right. The foundations for the assassination of JFK were laid in 1960 and they went very, very deep. It was an assassination waiting to happen and it did on 22 November 1963.
You talk funny.
Hi Truth Seekers, It's Gary King, I am planning on contacting everyone who comments on this show; and I hope you will participate as well, to declare a winner of the debate. Jim's, LBJ was the pivotal player, Gary King's, Zionist Ideology Agenda or John Hankey's, LBJ heard the shot flying over his head. Cast your vote with a comment to back it up. That way you can be part of the debate series! So jump in the ring and start swinging!
Good point from John Hankey on Obama wanting to prosecute the torturers. After the torture story broke and the talk was all about bringing the torturers to justice, what was the first thing Obama did? He went to the CIA headquarters and told the CIA they had nothing to worry about. Obama knew what way the wind was blowing and you know what they say: When the wind blows - bend.... and Obama bent.
I have always wondered whether the so-called threat of a nuclear "holocaust" (John Hankey) was real or was it, in fact, a ruse, a con job, a massive deception that was really part of the JFK assassination cover up. Was the nonexistent threat of nuclear war part and parcel of the planning BEFORE the assassination? What better explains the behavior of so many people if we assume they were all fed this big lie about a potential nuclear war? From the The DPD to the autopsy doctors - were they all told this specious nonsense of a nuclear war and unless they did what they were told, America was going to fry in a nuclear inferno? The bogus threat of a nuclear war facilitated the cover up. Did Johnson really believe it or did he know it was a crock of sh1t and nothing more than a leverto make everybody fall into line? And what a lever it was! If the threat of nuclear war was a lie, it certainly worked. People who were told the lie about nuclear war were convinced of its veracity and behaved accordingly. America was conned again. Does anyone know where the spectre of nuclear war originated after JFK's assassination? Who was the first person to make a reference to the possibility of a nuclear war after the assassination of JFK? Was it Johnson?Does anyone know?
Hey Vince, who won the debate?
Gary,Jury still out. Verdict pending further aural analysis of available data i.e. still listening. Too close to call.Get back to you asap.VW
Having listened carefully to the three protagonists in the debate, so far I think it's James Henry Fetzer by a country mile for me. John Hankey is , to use his own brand of colorful language, full of shit. Hankey talks the talk but he doesn't walk the walk. Too many unsubstantiated, cavalier and fanciful statements and groundless assumptions from John boy that have no foundation in the truth. John sounds good but in the final analysis, his specious bunch of baloney doesn't cut crap. As for Gary, I am still evaluating his contribution and will give my decision in due course.But as I have said, it's James Henry for me by a knock out in relation to John Hankey's smoke-and-mirrors burnt sacrifice of an offering.Nolo contendere. James Henry wins hands down.
Thanks Vince, It looks like a TKO from your score card. I appreciate the amount of time you have put into this thread and the debate!
Gary,I'm taking my time with this. Here's a little tidbit of information for you. Did you know that one of Jim's interviewees claimed that Yitzhak Rabin was actually in Dealey Plaza on 22 November 1963? Whether that's true or not, I don't know. Jim will remember who the guy was who said it in one of Jim's podcasts. It's a while ago. Maybe you could ask Jim if he recalls who the guy was.My own recollection of the podcast was Jim's reaction to the guy's statement that Yitzhak Rabin was there on 22 November 1963. Jim's reaction was total consternation as he repeated the guy's words:" Yitzhak Rabin in Dealey Plaza on 22 November 1963???!!!! "Ask Jim if the podcast is still available. I think it was deleted. Maybe not.
I did a quick Start Page search and the guest was Lenny Bloom on 6/29/12. There is some evidence that Rabin was in Dallas on 11/22: The wife of Yitzhak Rabin, Leah Rabin, revealed in a biography, that Rabin was in Dallas when Kennedy was assassinated.
I would characterize LBJ's role in JFK's assassination as that of a project manager. LBJ helped coordinate the efforts of the various groups involved. Johnson could not have on his own decided to have Kennedy shot in the streets of Dallas in broad daylight and then gotten the intelligence community, the government and media to coverup the crime for going on 50 years now. But he was the man in a position to make things happen on the ground and THAT is the point that Fetzer and Phil Nelson are arguing. Gary King brings up the under reported role of the Mossad in the JFK assassination. Michael Collins Piper's book Final Judgment documents that in 1963 JFK was embroiled in a bitter secret conflict with Israeli leader David Ben-Gurion over Israel’s drive to build the atomic bomb; that Ben-Gurion resigned in disgust, saying that because of JFK’s policies, Israel’s "existence [was] in danger." Then upon JFK’s assassination, U.S. policy toward Israel began an immediate 180-degree turnaround.Israeli historian Avner Cohen’s book, Israel and the Bomb, confirms the conflict between JFK and Israel so powerfully that, Israel’s Ha’aretz, declared Cohen’s revelations would "necessitate the rewriting of Israel’s entire history."In any case, Cohen pointed out, "the transition from Kennedy to [Lyndon] Johnson . . . benefited the Israeli nuclear program."Jack Ruby was on the payroll of the Lansky Crime Syndicate-connected Bronfman family (now headed by Edgar Bronfman, leader of the World Jewish Congress).When New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison prosecuted trade executive Clay Shaw with conspiracy in the assassination, Garrison had stumbled upon the Mossad link.Although (after his acquittal) Shaw was revealed to have been a CIA asset, in 1963 Shaw served on the board of a Rome-based company, Permindex, which was actually a front for a Mossad-sponsored arms procurement operation.A primary shareholder in Permindex, the Banque De Credit Internationale of Geneva, was not only the fiefdom of Tibor Rosenbaum, a high-level Mossad official, but also the chief money laundry for Meyer Lansky, "chairman" of the crime syndicate and long-time Israeli loyalist.http://www.afrocubaweb.com/news/mossadjfk.htm No serious researcher should underestimate Israel's roles in the JFK assassination or 9/11. It appears that Israel can overthrow US presidents whenever they need to. 9/11 demonstrated that Israel has enough power to nuke the the biggest buildings in America's big city in heart of it's financial center, as well as nuke the headquarters of our military might, the Pentagon. Who else could commit these acts and get away with it?
So who one the debate? That was a great comment by the way, It wasn't Cuba that look over America nor Russia it was Israel. Mission accomplished.
I enjoyed this show quite a bit. I would give the edge to Fetzer - you guys made some great points but didn't refute his case for Johnson being in the center of op. I just downloaded Michael Collins Piper's eBook Final Judgment and I highly recommend this to any serious student of the JFK assassination. A case could be made that David Ben-Gurion was the main man behind the JFK assassination. Piper has been pointing this out for years but it's still an under reported aspect of the assassination.
A good idea of LBJ's attitude toward JFK can be found in Gore Vidal's book Palimpsest. Writing about the 1960 Democratic Convention, Vidal writes:" I recall Jack looking a bit dazed. He had a prepared spiel which he rushed through.........Lyndon Johnson was more interesting than Jack. He worked us over thoroughly. He assured us that his recent heart attack had not been all that serious but he did confess, that at one point in the hospital, he and Lady Bird had debated whether or not to go ahead and buy a blue suit that he had picked out just before the attack. " We decided to buy it because, one way or another, I'd get some wear out of it." He made some guarded allusions to Jack's health. "I'm willing to bet that Johnson was wearing that same blue suit on November 22 1963.One way or another........
Both your preoccupation with testosterone and your fixation with LBJ's testicles and their orientation at any given time are, to say the least, worrying. Are you on any particular medication at the moment?I think we, as other blog contributors, have a right to know.Thank you.
Truth & Perversions of John F. Kennedy - Seymour Hersh Interview - YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTHbzEGwx5gPublished on Sep 27, 2013 "SEYMOUR HERSH is the journalist who authored the excellent book "The Dark Side of Camelot" and he blows the lid off of the FAIRY TALES about the elitist sexually degenerated Kennedy family. Far too often, so called "truth seekers" think that just because someone gets killed that automatically makes them some "hero personality." When in REALITY, many times these elitist murders are bad guys killing other bad elites, plain and simple. JFK and his brother RFK were two blue blood sexually degenerated elitist WHITE TRASH is what they were. Also, it can be 100 % verified that JFK's father Jack Kennedy was a well known money launderer for Nazi Germany before the war officially ended in 1945. NONE of this REALITY matches the FAIRY TALES told by the JFK worshipers in the so called "truth movement." Even if JFK did try to do things such as end the Federal Reserve, that still does NOT mean he did not have his own elitist motives for doing so, far away from benefiting the masses of people."~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Did Jim say he liked Hersh's book? Looks like another hit piece on JFK. Anthony Summers is a sensationalist writer and has not written a important book I will take Garrison, Prouty and Mark Lane over those guys anytime. Anyone who uses E Howard Hunt as a source, doesn't know what he's talking about. Hunt was up to his eyeballs in the Bay of Pigs and the assassination as well as Watergate. He is an evil and devious person whose "death bed confession" was a hoax. Read about Hunt in "Plausible Denial," a court case in Miami in which Hunt sued for defamation. LOL. As to presidents of the US, they hold no power. They act as puppets to the elite who give the orders. The CIA is in charge with its black ops and black budget and was a rogue organization totally unaccountable at the time. There is no way Johnson acted independently or could give orders to the CIA.
"Anthony Summers is a sensationalist writer and has not written a (sic) important book. ""JFK and his brother RFK were two blue blooded sexually degenerated (sic) elitist WHITE TRASH (is what they were) (?)"Fuck you! You illiterate cunt!
Oh, I forgot. The Emmy goes to Gary and Hankey. The latter has good taste in books and he committed no fallacy of appeal to authority becaouse those he cited were authorities! (Lovely production, Gary.)
I completely agree with you on this Jim. Johnson and his Masonic buddy J. Edgar Hoover were in key positions to control the "investigation" after the deed was done. I believe Madelyn Duncan Brown is telling the truth, more or less. I do not trust Hankey. Just a gut feeling. He sounds too manipulative too my sensibilities
John Hankey...hands down....Hunt was a company man til his dying breath...Sorry but pointing to an agenda driven book by Phil Nelson, James Henry, doesn't cut it for me...documented evidence and citations may have helped your cause but hearsay (MDB) is inadmissible!
Why don't you get back to your kindergarten sandbox blog?Troll. Shill.
So how long have you had the hots for Ralph Cinque and how long have you been a faggot with a blog?Just curious.
Be safe and be strong, honey.
X-CON and London...The only trolls here are you...I answered the question posed after the show and stated why...This is the comment section for a radio show, and I don't see your views here except on my comment which makes you the troll, the comments sound much like Ralph Cinque assuming a fake persona again, because shocker X-con and London are too cowardly to set their profile off of private. You want some of me, you know where to find me....piss off....
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Very good format, it allows well developed thoughts, instead of sound-bite bickering. Mr. King's presentation was very well done. It would have been great to hear Bill Cooper's dissertations on the Occult significance of Daley Plaza and the ritual of "The Killing of a King" and how the wounds were in the pattern of Hiram Abiff. Cooper also trashes Fletcher Prouty and Oliver Stone as being dis-info and laughing at the sheeple for being led on tangents.
Hey Mopar21277, Thanks for the complement, what's your call on the winner of the debate? Can you answer a question for me? Why did Bill Cooper come out with such good information for so long and then suddenly "The Driver Did It" when it was clearly not the case? I have always wondered about that. His "Report from Iron Mountain" video is a Masterpiece. PS: I am reading about "Hiram Abiff"..... always one more thing to discover!
The question up for debate was:Was LBJ the pivotal player in the assassination of JFK?Here we must differentiate between "pivotal player", "prime mover" and "moving force". Was LBJ the "prime mover"? In my view he was not. There were other "prime movers". Was LBJ " a prime mover "? In my view he was.Was LBJ the "moving force" behind the assassination of JFK? In my view he was not. Was LBJ a "moving force" behind the assassination of JFK? In my view he was. Finally, was LBJ the "pivotal" player in the assassination of JFK? In my view the answer is yes.He was "pivotal". Without LBJ the assassination of JFK would not and could not have happened. LBJ was central and crucial to the assassination of JFK and the successful cover up that followed. LBJ was, indeed, the PIVOTAL player in the assassination of JFK.
Another Round for Dr Fetzer
To conclude Professor Jim Fetzer has proved his case.LBJ was the pivotal player in the assassination of JFK. Professor Fetzer's 12 + points were like battering rams at the doors ofof the dark rooms to which John Hankey and Gary must have assuredly fled after their encounter with Professor Fetzer. 12+ battering rams or 12+ cauldrons of boiling pitch over the battlements. Take your pick, John and Gary.To paraphrase LBJ, Professor James Fetzer knows the difference between chicken shit and chicken salad.
Of course, I should add that Gary's presentation of his argument was very good and who knows: maybe the Israelis had some input regarding the assassination of JFK. They certainly had good reason to have JFK removed. My own view is that the Americans involved in the assassination - and I believe the assassination of JFK was a domestic affair - would not have wanted to make themselves a hostage to a foreign nationlike Israel or any other for that matter. I do not believe Israelwas on a need-to-know-or-get-involved basis back in 1963. JFKhad enough enemies at homewithout having to look for them abroad. But if the Iraelis were involved, it still does not invalidate the argument that LBJwas the pivotal player in the assassination of JFK. Simply put, if LBJ had not been vice president JFK would not have been assassinated.VW3
Your "blog" is homoeroticism on steroids.Leave Jim Fetzer and Ralph Cinque alone!! They are NOT interested in yourhomoerotic fantasies!!
^^ Ralph Cinque everybody ^^ The greatest JFK Researcher since Mark Lane....
This comment has been removed by the author.
^^Ralph Cinque^^ using yet another fake name everybody...it is a documented fact that Ralph Cinque uses fake names to harass people....you can read more about it at http://bpete1969.blogspot.com and http://www.ralphcinqueisastupidbitch.blogspot.com
Jim forgot to post hard evidence that Johnson was a "pivotal player" in the assassination. Why would the CiA need the okay from LBJ? From the late 50s to 1960, they were a force unto themselves carrying out assassinations worldwiide.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"Thus, endowed with complete autonomy, a virtually unlimited budget, and a de facto co-directorship under the Eisenhower administration, the CIA in the period between 1953 and 1960 developed into a world power.(17) The CIA was represented in 108 different countries, commanded submarines and jet planes, and controlled 30,000 agents under the cover of diplomatic, commercial, industrial, journalistic, military, technical, labor, university and secret activities."
LBJ was THE pivotal player in the assassination of JFK.Why would LBJ need the OK from the CIA since the CIAwere involved in the conspiracy to assassinate JFK?Talk sense, woman!!"Hunt was threatening to reveal information that the CIA was implicated in the Kennedy assassination."From this very blogspot 2013 YOUR notes:"Anyone who uses E.H. Hunt as a source doesn't what he's talking about."P.S. Anyone who uses E.H. Hunt as a source doesn't know what the fuck SHE'S talking about.
FROM THIS VERY BLOGSPOT, 2009My notes: Plausible Denial by Mark Lane http://halbower.blogspot.com/2009/02/plausible-denial-by-mark-lane.html MOTIVE; Why did the CIA Murder the President?If the CIA thought that the defense of their country would be served by killing Kennedy, they would rationalize his assassination. Kennedy had fired Allen Dulles, Charles Cabell, and Richard Bissell after the Bay of Pigs. This rocked the hierarchy at the CIA. Furthermore, he refused to invade Cuba on 2 occasions. He allowed the Berlin Wall to be built with escalation with the USSR. He made a secret deal with the Russians following the Cuban Missile Crisis. He wrote NSAM to withdraw all Americans (not just troops but CIA as well) from Vietnam by ’65. He got test ban treaty with Russia. He wanted to end the Cold War in a second term. He signed NSAM 55, 56 and 57 which ended the reign of the CIA. They were not allowed to use any weapon more powerful than a hand gun. They were not allowed to wage covert war anymore. If the CIA viewed these items as being compromises to national security they justify killing Kennedy, regardless of the immorality of the act.Kennedy’s critics, including Howard Hunt, wrote books and essays blaming Kennedy for the Bay of Pigs and for the ascendancy of communism in Southeast Asia, Berlin and Cuba.Operation Mongoose was a Castro-assassination plan developed by the CIA. These plans included removing his beard, poisoning him with untraceable chemicals and blowing him up with a bomb that looked like a seashell. McNamara’s liaison to the CIA was General Edward G. Lansdale (General Y in JFK). He wanted to wage a huge war to oust Castro from Cuba. .....Colonel Fletcher Prouty (Mr. X in JFK) was in charge of clandestine military support for the CIA. He confirms that Kennedy wanted the CIA dismantled and was going to do it after the ’64 election. Prouty was the man who would deliver the NSAM’s to the joint chiefs. The joint chiefs and the rest of the military was being ordered to “break the CIA into a thousand pieces” by Kennedy. Prouty confirms that Kennedy wanted all Americans including the CIA out of Vietnam. The CIA had been there since ’45 and they were in despair!.......The Kennedy’s were discussing bringing Cuba back into the community of nations. They had sent some envoys there to discuss this. Cuba’s big concern was that the U.S. would try to overthrow Castro and reconstitute its domination over Cuba’s resources, ala the Batista days. .;;;;;;Nixon had ties with the Kennedy assassination too. He told Haldeman that Hunt and the Cubans would open up the whole Bay of Pigs thing again. Hunt was threatening to reveal information that the CIA was implicated in the Kennedy assassination.The CIA seemed impervious after JFK’s death, able to easily deflect the weak media attention it received. That is, until Victor Marchetti wrote his article for Spotlight magazine. (Read whole article.)
Don'tcha see yet how it was all Faked? All these endless trails and contradictions offered up to you so effortlessly (9/11?)... I haven't heard you yet give a professional critique of Culto's comprehensive and compulsory analysis of this whole staged affair yet jim. Is the subject matter not worth your serious time (A la obf)? I don't think offering up 'to say it was faked is stupid' quite cuts the mustard in terms of an expected rebuttal on a serious thesis. so let's see; out of all the subject matter everywhere that you dive headlong right into, the two areas which most deserve your avid attention and detailed consideration (complete faked video/victims on 9/11, JFK staged assassination) you just will not seriously entertain (or write and write and write and talk and talk and talk, and write on!). It is because it is the truth, isn't it jim? but the truth that comes out only at the end of the lesson. the time is finally here for these truths to come out. what's 5 or 6 weeks between friends, eh jim? good job, my friend.http://letsrollforums.com/showpost.php?p=225299&postcount=238can you at least comment on this single and very important page jim? http://letsrollforums.com/showpost.php?p=241354
Hey, Pshea,I know 911 was faked along with recent "terrorist" events. You Must See These Faked photographs of Building 6Black magic marker is so obvious! By Judy Wood supporter http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=509xQgcoMN8
Yeah, and THIS one too....
http://www.amazon.com/End-Days-Assassination-John-Kennedy/dp/0062083481This is the kind of crap that is coming out for the 50th anniversary. The media are still claiming Oswald was the lone assassin. This idiotic author was on C-Span book notes recently pushing this nonsense and claimed witnesses on the 5th floor of the TSDB heard the gunshots and the sound of three shells falling to the floor. It's time researchers get their act together, or perhaps they like the money they are raking in from their book sales. Truly disgusting.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~In End of Days, James L. Swanson, the New York Times bestselling author of Mahnunt: The 12-Day Chase for Lincoln's Killer, brings to life the minute-by-minute details of the JFK assassination—from the Kennedys’ arrival in Texas through the shooting in Dealey Plaza and the shocking aftermath that continues to reverberate in our national consciousness fifty years later.The assassination of John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963, has been the subject of enduring debate, speculation, and numerous conspiracy theories, but Swanson’s absorbing and complete account follows the event hour-by-hour, from the moment Lee Harvey Oswald conceived of the crime three days before its execution, to his own murder two days later at a Dallas Police precinct at the hands of Jack Ruby, a two-bit nightclub owner.Based on sweeping research never before collected so powerfully in a single volume, and illustrated with photographs, End of Days distills Kennedy’s assassination into a pulse-pounding thriller that is sure to become the definitive popular account of this historic crime for years to come.
I think this book coming out is fantastic! the End of days by a mr. Swanson(g)! Really!? I bet it is designed as disguised farce just to piss off all serious jfk assassination investigators, before the big fakery reveal (just like bill o Reilly's 'killing Jesus' bestseller out now). And he did another book on Lincoln. there are amazing synchonicities between both 'assassinations', so you can guess what I am going to say next. killed in a theatre, eh? center stage almost! alrighty then... Anyway, it was all meant to come out in the end. I believe November 23 or 11/23 takes over where the end left off!judy wood is playing her part. it is all about getting the people to not trust their government (control the mind). it doesn't matter how it's done, as long as it's done. some have moved on from the anger and come to the relief stage. but all will know never to give up our power again. very soon.regards, peter sheehan.
Ok, It looks like Fetzer has won the "Commenter Score Card" debate by a 10 to 2 decision. Some close rounds could have gone to Hankey but failed to show up on the score card. Gary King, despite several upper cuts, one strong blow to the Jaw and a few body blows failed to win a round. My Thanks to all!
you sound very much like jeff rense, gary. but that's probably just me. good show but next time is Jim Fetzer v's Culto - bullshit v's truth, massive murder conspiracy v's massive hoax!! what a fine final JFK finale!
The Democratic and Republican Parties are for popular consumption: two theatrical troops that have nothing at all to do with the real politics. The real politics is decided at higher levels. Jim Fetzer and John Hankey both have parochial illusions in the system. Gary King got closer to the centers of power, but the CFR is in the outer circle of power. The CFR, Club of Rome, Bilderberg Club, and suchlike groups are think tanks for proposing strategies to the real decision-makers, who bring together key players from the corporate boardrooms to choose among the options that the think tanks have worked out. Those think tanks also have ties to the more secretive formations who have the transnational contacts with the means carry out the decided-upon strategies. The transnational contacts were playing the central role in the JFK assassination. Johnson was an enabler but was taking his cues from others. The debate ignored the fascist aspects of the Cold War, whose real origin and history continue to be neglected in this country. One extremely important transnational formation that wasn't even mentioned by the debaters was the CAL, the Mexican affiliate of the world fascist alliance. CAL was considered too pro-Nazi and antisemitic by the fascist forces for membership in the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations (ABN), the forerunner to the World Anti-Communist League (WACL). George de Mohrenschildt, Oswald's handler, was a leading member of the CAL. Dallas "tramp" E Howard Hunt, who devised the plan for the 1954 anti-Arbenz coup in Guatemala, also set up there a Kuomintang/ABN affiliate. Sam Giancana's lawyer was a member of that same ABN affiliate. At the beginning of WWII, De Mohrenschildt was rejected from the OSS because he "was alleged to be a Nazi espionage agent". (Richard Helms, CIA doc.) Also, by British Intelligence. Yet de Mohrenschildt's older brother Dimitri was in the OSS and was one of the founders of the CIA's Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty. George H W Bush roomed with George de Mohrenschildt's nephew, and Jackie's aunt knew him well - Jackie herself knowing him as "Uncle George". When Oswald returned to New York from Minsk, he was met by Spaz T Reikin, who was the Secretary General of the American Friends of the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations (AFABBN) and was also in touch with Army Intelligence, SS Maj Gen Reinhardt Gehlen's spy organization in Germany, the Kuomintang, and right-wing Cubans. Among the last was Oswald's "Student Revolutionary Directorate" (DRE) contact Carlos Bringuier, as well as other ABN milieu. Sitting on the board of the Permindex Corporation with American Clay Shaw were various Europeans with major Nazi connections, including its president Nagy Ferenc, who was formerly leader of the Anti-Communist Countrymen's Party (ACCP) of Hungary. ACCP came out of the Axis group Arrow Cross and re-appears in today's Hungary as the fascist Jobbik group. On the Waren Commission were AFABN friends and Nazi-facilitators Allen Dulles and John Jay McCloy. Later in White House, capitalizing on the assassination, were Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and George H W Bush - all of which worked with the AFABN, the ABN, and WACL to enable their activities in Latin America and Europe.
Correction: it was the lawyer of Carlos Marcello, not Sam Giancana, who was a member of the Guatemala ABN affiliate.
Trading is the Best Business Ever in the World.. All News updates about Forex Business, Latest Currency news updates, latest forex trading business updates, trading updates, forex trading latest news, forex brokers directory, forex brokers list, Dollars news affairs, Stock Markets, stock market news, stock market analysis, technology news, international forex markets, international forex business news and all updates about Forex TradingForexAffairs.Com
SUBSCRIBE to the iTunes feed
STREAM premieres on Revere Radio
5pm CST (2300 GMT) M-W-F:
DONATE to Scholars for 9/11 Truth: