Journalist Michael Shellenberger reflects on the politics of Kennedy's assassination, the 'deep state,' and the crisis of trust in America's government and institutions.
The assassination of JFK is still relevant in the scope of all of American history. When Ben Franklin was asked after the U.S Constitution was written in 1787 whether we had a monarchy or republic, Franklin replied "A republic if you can keep it". Later on, Abraham Lincoln asserted in his Gettysburg Address that the U.S.had a government that was "of the people, by the people, and for the people." If the President of The United States can be assassinated because of a plot of enemies from within, that included a clique of CIA operatives, and that the government would go on to cover up what happened, it puts this great republican experiment that began in 1776 into question. Yes, it is essential to get the historical record right. But it is the "big picture" that matters the most.
Michael Schellenberger makes some very thought provoking points concerning the Left and the CIA, and how the "Progressives" made their bargain with the National Security Establishment. However, his observation that it all began under Obama is only partly true. The collusion actually began under Bill Clinton, who while while he was Governor of Arkansas evidently cooperated with, ( Or at a minimum had knowledge of), CIA operations supporting the Contra War during the 1980s. There are even accusations that he was recruited as an informant while a college student.
Indeed, it was under Bill Clinton when the rehabilitation of the CIA began. For example, after the controversy from the Oliver Stone film JFK and other themed motion pictures, Hollywood inexplicably changed direction in the mid 1990s when the CIA made an overt move to work with motion picture companies. Studios began to involve themselves with one Chase Brandon, a CIA Officer whose task was to advise motion picture studios on anything involving the intelligence world. For the next ten years, Brandon was involved in the making of 13 movies, 11 TV series, and numerous other film projects. And this was being openly done in public, with nothing covert about it. The CIA was indeed being remade to look as if it was just one more Federal Agency.
Bill Clinton therefore prepared the ground for Obama and the "Progressives" to make their Faustian bargain with the National Security Establishment, for they apparently saw advantage to be gained for them if they cooperated, and great trouble if they did not.
This is interesting but I had to smile when I read, " . . it was under Bill Clinton when the rehabilitation of the CIA began." I read the Judicial Watch piece at the site you provided the link to.
Is this the same Bill Clinton that Bill Barr advised to drop any further investigation into the BCCI scandal. Where upon GHW Bush's exit from the White House, 41 pardoned some if not all involved in court cases at the time.
These people, CIA and military, Slick Willey came damned close to getting caught red handed laundering money. Lots of money, never accounted for.
If relieving those judged guilty, including ,potentially, GHW Bush from being punished for any involvement in flooding he US with cocaine is rehabilitation of CIA I'll kiss a monkeys behind. Where I come from that is called playing favorites in Clinton's case, I'm of the opinion he was owned by CIA. In his case I'm not willing to call it coercion, if he could be president he was more than willing to cosie up to 41, a person he seems to have developed an intense love for after leaving the White House.
In my opinion, no entity of the U.S. Government is above the law. None. Lots here to discuss. See below, about my conditions of employment as a draftee while in Berlin.
Members of the military when I was in had to sign an agreement that if you were captured or what ever you would remain silent or else. And that those above you would deny and knowledge of you or your mission.
Why would this not apply to Olly and Company?
US Army 1968-1979 Berlin Germany, I never wore a uniform until I prepared to clear post and come home.
From what I read at the Judicial watch article related all the redacted material in the Mena related document must be problematic to allow an understanding of the full context of events.
In a sense you have made my day. I am curious John, have you ever read the April 13, 1989 report, DRUGS, LAW ENFORCEMENT AND FOREIGN POLICY, Prepared by the SUBCOMMITTEE ON TERRORISM, NARCOTICS AND INTERNATIONAL OPERATION of the COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE.
That Bill Clinton ( And also Hillary) are dirty, corrupt liars is an open secret to anyone with any degree of intelligence. And that Bill Clinton in some way had ties with the Agency is also a reasonable presumption. Also regarding Mena, that the CIA says in the report that it had no knowledge of, or involvement with Barry Seal, and then half the report is redacted? Lets remember this is the same agency which said to the Warren Commission that it had no knowledge of Lee Harvey Oswald. I don't believe that the Agency worked directly with Seal. However, they instead likely knew of Seal's operation and allowed him to continue, because many of the Cartels were funding the Contras. Which well suited the CIA's interests. It was indeed later proven correct in journalist Gary Webb's expose' "Dark Alliance, which itself came out while Clinton was in office. And in the end cost Gary Webb his job, his livelihood, and eventually, his life.
Because of Bill Clinton's likely friendship with the Agency, its tarnished image needed to be scrubbed clean in the wake of the Iran/ Contra affair, as well the strong public reaction to the Oliver Stone Film, JFK which resulted in the JFK records act. This process began under Clinton, continued under Bush, and saw full flowering under Obama.
Personal note- My youngest brother was himself in the Army during the Cold War and was also stationed in Berlin. He was with the detachment at Spandau Prison that guarded Rudolf Hess. And during much of my tour in the Marines (1977-1985) I myself was doing Intel related work. Because it was so sensitive, there were a number of foreign countries that I was not allowed to travel to or reside in.
John I happen to respect your comments here very much. Your view points seems as steady as a rock, your judgement the same.
My problem with CIA is the fact they still avoid being responsible for some very serious transgressions. Forget about the JKF case for a moment, acknowledging Jefferson Morley's frustrations with me personally.
I read your comment to me in my notifications. I can not disagree with your take on things because I do agree and have little or no basis for criticisms.
But having CIA controlling foreign policy should be over with, IMO.
There was a time when I had lots of respect for GHW Bush, shot out of the air three times and still alive is no fluke.
However had the truth been known about his personal behavior with regards to shady incidents he was involved after graduating from Yale, I doubting he would have ran for president.
It is obvious to me you have a much greater personal knowledge of the changes at CIA than I. However judging from recent history I know about I have serious doubts about how affective any scrubbing might have been.
Safe to say you and I could spend hours discussing the subject matter here. I have an appetite for th information you have backing your opinions I simple at this point in time disagree with some of your assessments here.
I will not belabor the fact that we has a basic disagreement here. I'm thinking our opinions are pretty far apart on much of this. As a result and because I do respect your opinions I'd like to ask you a couple of questions that I really don't need answers to but as a way of you understanding where I'm coming from.
What got me so fired up about CIA and it's history is that CIA is very adapt at stimying investigations better left to law enforcement. NUMEC investigation curtailed because CIA stonewalling records, JFK and RFK attempts to get Zionist organizations and Israeli fundraising organizations curtailed because orders by JFK were ignored by LBJ. And then the investigations into USAEC about the diversion of highly enriched U-235 which CIA truncated by refusing to release documents which evidently implicated Commission members.
A move I believe used to protect folks who betrayed their county namely one JJ Angleton and others. (Tellr maybe). Read Roger Mattsons Book, Stealing the Atomic Bomb
Then the drug running, not an acceptable activity,IMO. CIA involving themselves in in cocaine trafficking because it served their purpose, flooded the country with the drug and filled numerous prisons in the process and nothing much has changed as a result that I can see. Then Russia gate NCA analysts and former
CIA members have refuted the claim. Russia didn't hack those emails they were
downloaded, IMO.
DEA personnel originally were a very many former CIA who got fired from CIA back when Stansfield Turner cleaned house there. This caused a very serious problem for the fledgling DEA. IMO. So, it seems to me if you do know about these issues you are willing to give CIA a pass.
One last Issue, are you familiar with the DRUGS, LAW ENFORCEMENT AND FOREIGN POLICY Report prepared by the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics and International Operations of the Committee on Foreign Relations United States Senate, ordered in 1987 and completed in 1989?
The report was better known as the Kerry Report. I have a copy and time and again CIA used it's leverage to deny the investigation very important records needed to properly chase the truth. Same as with the instances listed above.
Even if you have to hold your nose, no disrespect intended, IMO you need read it.
GHW Bush was a hero in WW II but not after. Ever her of the$ 5-7million oil platform that disappeared and the insurance pay out of $11 million, and that is just for starters.
Now for Berlin, the thing I'm most proud of for my time in the Army is my Army of Occupation medal.
John I happen to respect your comments here very much. Your view points seems as steady as a rock, your judgement the same.
My problem with CIA is the fact they still avoid being responsible for some very serious transgressions. Forget about the JKF case for a moment, acknowledging Jefferson Morley's frustrations with me personally.
I read your comment to me in my notifications. I can not disagree with your take on things because I do agree and have little or no basis for criticisms.
But having CIA controlling foreign policy should be over with, IMO.
There was a time when I had lots of respect for GHW Bush, shot out of the air three times and still alive is no fluke.
However had the truth been known about his personal behavior with regards to shady incidents he was involved after graduating from Yale, I doubting he would have ran for president.
It is obvious to me you have a much greater personal knowledge of the changes at CIA than I. However judging from recent history I know about I have serious doubts about how affective any scrubbing might have been.
Safe to say you and I could spend hours discussing the subject matter here. I have an appetite for th information you have backing your opinions I simple at this point in time disagree with some of your assessments here.
I will not belabor the fact that we has a basic disagreement here. I'm thinking our opinions are pretty far apart on much of this. As a result and because I do respect your opinions I'd like to ask you a couple of questions that I really don't need answers to but as a way of you understanding where I'm coming from.
What got me so fired up about CIA and it's history is that CIA is very adapt at stimying investigations better left to law enforcement. NUMEC investigation curtailed because CIA stonewalling records, JFK and RFK attempts to get Zionist organizations and Israeli fundraising organizations curtailed because orders by JFK were ignored by LBJ. And then the investigations into USAEC about the diversion of highly enriched U-235 which CIA truncated by refusing to release documents which evidently implicated Commission members.
A move I believe used to protect folks who betrayed their county namely one JJ Angleton and others. (Tellr maybe). Read Roger Mattsons Book, Stealing the Atomic Bomb
Then the drug running, not an acceptable activity,IMO. CIA involving themselves in in cocaine trafficking because it served their purpose, flooded the country with the drug and filled numerous prisons in the process and nothing much has changed as a result that I can see. Then Russia gate NCA analysts and former
CIA members have refuted the claim. Russia didn't hack those emails they were
downloaded, IMO.
DEA personnel originally were a very many former CIA who got fired from CIA back when Stansfield Turner cleaned house there. This caused a very serious problem for the fledgling DEA. IMO. So, it seems to me if you do know about these issues you are willing to give CIA a pass.
One last Issue, are you familiar with the DRUGS, LAW ENFORCEMENT AND FOREIGN POLICY Report prepared by the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics and International Operations of the Committee on Foreign Relations United States Senate, ordered in 1987 and completed in 1989?
The report was better known as the Kerry Report. I have a copy and time and again CIA used it's leverage to deny the investigation very important records needed to properly chase the truth. Same as with the instances listed above.
Even if you have to hold your nose, no disrespect intended, IMO you need read it.
GHW Bush was a hero in WW II but not after. Ever her of the$ 5-7million oil platform that disappeared and the insurance pay out of $11 million, and that is just for starters.
Now for Berlin, the thing I'm most proud of for my time in the Army is my Army of Occupation medal.
John I happen to respect your comments here very much. Your view points seems as steady as a rock, your judgement the same.
My problem with CIA is the fact they still avoid being responsible for some very serious transgressions. Forget about the JKF case for a moment, acknowledging Jefferson Morley's frustrations with me personally.
I read your comment to me in my notifications. I can not disagree with your take on things because I do agree and have little or no basis for criticisms.
But having CIA controlling foreign policy should be over with, IMO.
There was a time when I had lots of respect for GHW Bush, shot out of the air three times and still alive is no fluke.
However had the truth been known about his personal behavior with regards to shady incidents he was involved after graduating from Yale, I'm doubting he would have ran for president.
It is obvious to me you have a much greater personal knowledge of the changes at CIA than I. However judging from recent history I know about I have serious doubts about how affective any scrubbing might have been.
Safe to say you and I could spend hours discussing the subject matter here. I have an appetite for the information you have backing your opinions an need to learn much more. I simply at this point in time disagree with some of your assessments here.
I will not belabor the fact that we has a basic disagreement here. I'm thinking our opinions are pretty far apart on much of this. As a result and because I do respect your opinions I'd like to ask you a couple of questions that I really don't need answers to but as a way of you understanding where I'm coming from.
What got me so fired up about CIA and it's history is that CIA is very adapt at stimying investigations better left to law enforcement. NUMEC investigation curtailed because CIA stonewalling records, JFK and RFK attempts to get Zionist organizations and Israeli fundraising organizations curtailed because orders by JFK & RFK were ignored by LBJ. The investigations into USAEC about the diversion of highly enriched U-235 which CIA truncated by refusing to release documents which evidently implicated Commission members.
A move I believe used to protect folks who betrayed their county namely one JJ Angleton, but in my opinion there are others. (Teller maybe). Read Roger Mattsons Book, Stealing the Atomic Bomb
Then the drug running, not an acceptable activity,IMO. CIA involving themselves in in cocaine trafficking because it served their purpose, flooded the country with the drug and filled numerous prisons in the process and nothing much has changed as a result that I can see. Then Russia gate former NSA and former
CIA analysts have refuted the claim. Russia didn't hack those emails they were
downloaded, IMO.
DEA personnel originally were a very many former CIA who got fired from CIA back when Stansfield Turner cleaned house there. This caused a very serious problem for the fledgling DEA. IMO and facilitated illegal activities by CIA. It seems to me if you do know about these issues you are willing to give CIA and NSA a pass. I not so forgiving.
One last Issue, are you familiar with the DRUGS, LAW ENFORCEMENT AND FOREIGN POLICY. Report prepared by the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics and International Operations of the Committee on Foreign Relations United States Senate, ordered in 1987 and completed in 1989?
The report was better known as the Kerry Report. I have a copy and time and again CIA used it's leverage to deny the investigation very important records needed to properly chase the truth. Same as with the instances listed above.
Even if you have to hold your nose, no disrespect intended, IMO you need read it.
GHW Bush was a hero in WW II but not after. Ever hear of the $ 5-7million oil platform that disappeared and the insurance pay out of $11 million, and that is just for starters.
Now for Berlin, the thing I'm most proud of for my time in the Army is my Army of Occupation medal, something now that is deemed taboo by many.
I'm not making light of your comment, no criticism or argument from me here.
Just a short comment I've encountered elsewhere.
"When the new POTUS is given his National Security briefing they take him to a darkened room and show his a version of the JFK murder never seem by the public."
The message is made to be clearly understood. I'm just saying . . . .!
IMO with RFK's demise the "Company" had shot one sitting President for his beliefs and shot his brother running for president because he was very likely to win the election.
Why? MHO is that they new a good Catholic guy from a large very rich family would have definitely found out what happened or they would have had to shot a second elected president who happened to be JFK's brother.
It is exactly at this point in time CIA made it clearly known to the public they were not willing to take any chances on getting caught.
Couldn't shoot Nixon, one sitting president too many, so they drove him crazy instead. It was a short trip for "Trickey Dick"! Couldn't shoot Obama because of racial concerns about starting a race war.
BTW Ed who is this trump fellow anyhow? Could it be the NSA et. al. have regressed?
Curious folks want to know, it is getting later every minute.
The assassination of JFK is still relevant in the scope of all of American history. When Ben Franklin was asked after the U.S Constitution was written in 1787 whether we had a monarchy or republic, Franklin replied "A republic if you can keep it". Later on, Abraham Lincoln asserted in his Gettysburg Address that the U.S.had a government that was "of the people, by the people, and for the people." If the President of The United States can be assassinated because of a plot of enemies from within, that included a clique of CIA operatives, and that the government would go on to cover up what happened, it puts this great republican experiment that began in 1776 into question. Yes, it is essential to get the historical record right. But it is the "big picture" that matters the most.
Is it still possible to release the podcasts on the RSS feed, or will they now only be available on Youtube? Thanks.
Something went wrong all right!
Michael Schellenberger makes some very thought provoking points concerning the Left and the CIA, and how the "Progressives" made their bargain with the National Security Establishment. However, his observation that it all began under Obama is only partly true. The collusion actually began under Bill Clinton, who while while he was Governor of Arkansas evidently cooperated with, ( Or at a minimum had knowledge of), CIA operations supporting the Contra War during the 1980s. There are even accusations that he was recruited as an informant while a college student.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/clinton-was-cia-informer-as-student-new-book-claims-1.61558
https://www.judicialwatch.org/mena-uncovered-judicial-watch-discloses-secret-cia-report/
Indeed, it was under Bill Clinton when the rehabilitation of the CIA began. For example, after the controversy from the Oliver Stone film JFK and other themed motion pictures, Hollywood inexplicably changed direction in the mid 1990s when the CIA made an overt move to work with motion picture companies. Studios began to involve themselves with one Chase Brandon, a CIA Officer whose task was to advise motion picture studios on anything involving the intelligence world. For the next ten years, Brandon was involved in the making of 13 movies, 11 TV series, and numerous other film projects. And this was being openly done in public, with nothing covert about it. The CIA was indeed being remade to look as if it was just one more Federal Agency.
https://www.spyculture.com/clandestime-078-chase-brandon/
Bill Clinton therefore prepared the ground for Obama and the "Progressives" to make their Faustian bargain with the National Security Establishment, for they apparently saw advantage to be gained for them if they cooperated, and great trouble if they did not.
This is interesting but I had to smile when I read, " . . it was under Bill Clinton when the rehabilitation of the CIA began." I read the Judicial Watch piece at the site you provided the link to.
Is this the same Bill Clinton that Bill Barr advised to drop any further investigation into the BCCI scandal. Where upon GHW Bush's exit from the White House, 41 pardoned some if not all involved in court cases at the time.
These people, CIA and military, Slick Willey came damned close to getting caught red handed laundering money. Lots of money, never accounted for.
If relieving those judged guilty, including ,potentially, GHW Bush from being punished for any involvement in flooding he US with cocaine is rehabilitation of CIA I'll kiss a monkeys behind. Where I come from that is called playing favorites in Clinton's case, I'm of the opinion he was owned by CIA. In his case I'm not willing to call it coercion, if he could be president he was more than willing to cosie up to 41, a person he seems to have developed an intense love for after leaving the White House.
In my opinion, no entity of the U.S. Government is above the law. None. Lots here to discuss. See below, about my conditions of employment as a draftee while in Berlin.
Members of the military when I was in had to sign an agreement that if you were captured or what ever you would remain silent or else. And that those above you would deny and knowledge of you or your mission.
Why would this not apply to Olly and Company?
US Army 1968-1979 Berlin Germany, I never wore a uniform until I prepared to clear post and come home.
From what I read at the Judicial watch article related all the redacted material in the Mena related document must be problematic to allow an understanding of the full context of events.
In a sense you have made my day. I am curious John, have you ever read the April 13, 1989 report, DRUGS, LAW ENFORCEMENT AND FOREIGN POLICY, Prepared by the SUBCOMMITTEE ON TERRORISM, NARCOTICS AND INTERNATIONAL OPERATION of the COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE.
Thanks so much for the info here.
I have things to do today I'll be back later.
That Bill Clinton ( And also Hillary) are dirty, corrupt liars is an open secret to anyone with any degree of intelligence. And that Bill Clinton in some way had ties with the Agency is also a reasonable presumption. Also regarding Mena, that the CIA says in the report that it had no knowledge of, or involvement with Barry Seal, and then half the report is redacted? Lets remember this is the same agency which said to the Warren Commission that it had no knowledge of Lee Harvey Oswald. I don't believe that the Agency worked directly with Seal. However, they instead likely knew of Seal's operation and allowed him to continue, because many of the Cartels were funding the Contras. Which well suited the CIA's interests. It was indeed later proven correct in journalist Gary Webb's expose' "Dark Alliance, which itself came out while Clinton was in office. And in the end cost Gary Webb his job, his livelihood, and eventually, his life.
Because of Bill Clinton's likely friendship with the Agency, its tarnished image needed to be scrubbed clean in the wake of the Iran/ Contra affair, as well the strong public reaction to the Oliver Stone Film, JFK which resulted in the JFK records act. This process began under Clinton, continued under Bush, and saw full flowering under Obama.
Personal note- My youngest brother was himself in the Army during the Cold War and was also stationed in Berlin. He was with the detachment at Spandau Prison that guarded Rudolf Hess. And during much of my tour in the Marines (1977-1985) I myself was doing Intel related work. Because it was so sensitive, there were a number of foreign countries that I was not allowed to travel to or reside in.
John I happen to respect your comments here very much. Your view points seems as steady as a rock, your judgement the same.
My problem with CIA is the fact they still avoid being responsible for some very serious transgressions. Forget about the JKF case for a moment, acknowledging Jefferson Morley's frustrations with me personally.
I read your comment to me in my notifications. I can not disagree with your take on things because I do agree and have little or no basis for criticisms.
But having CIA controlling foreign policy should be over with, IMO.
There was a time when I had lots of respect for GHW Bush, shot out of the air three times and still alive is no fluke.
However had the truth been known about his personal behavior with regards to shady incidents he was involved after graduating from Yale, I doubting he would have ran for president.
It is obvious to me you have a much greater personal knowledge of the changes at CIA than I. However judging from recent history I know about I have serious doubts about how affective any scrubbing might have been.
Safe to say you and I could spend hours discussing the subject matter here. I have an appetite for th information you have backing your opinions I simple at this point in time disagree with some of your assessments here.
I will not belabor the fact that we has a basic disagreement here. I'm thinking our opinions are pretty far apart on much of this. As a result and because I do respect your opinions I'd like to ask you a couple of questions that I really don't need answers to but as a way of you understanding where I'm coming from.
What got me so fired up about CIA and it's history is that CIA is very adapt at stimying investigations better left to law enforcement. NUMEC investigation curtailed because CIA stonewalling records, JFK and RFK attempts to get Zionist organizations and Israeli fundraising organizations curtailed because orders by JFK were ignored by LBJ. And then the investigations into USAEC about the diversion of highly enriched U-235 which CIA truncated by refusing to release documents which evidently implicated Commission members.
A move I believe used to protect folks who betrayed their county namely one JJ Angleton and others. (Tellr maybe). Read Roger Mattsons Book, Stealing the Atomic Bomb
Then the drug running, not an acceptable activity,IMO. CIA involving themselves in in cocaine trafficking because it served their purpose, flooded the country with the drug and filled numerous prisons in the process and nothing much has changed as a result that I can see. Then Russia gate NCA analysts and former
CIA members have refuted the claim. Russia didn't hack those emails they were
downloaded, IMO.
DEA personnel originally were a very many former CIA who got fired from CIA back when Stansfield Turner cleaned house there. This caused a very serious problem for the fledgling DEA. IMO. So, it seems to me if you do know about these issues you are willing to give CIA a pass.
One last Issue, are you familiar with the DRUGS, LAW ENFORCEMENT AND FOREIGN POLICY Report prepared by the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics and International Operations of the Committee on Foreign Relations United States Senate, ordered in 1987 and completed in 1989?
The report was better known as the Kerry Report. I have a copy and time and again CIA used it's leverage to deny the investigation very important records needed to properly chase the truth. Same as with the instances listed above.
Even if you have to hold your nose, no disrespect intended, IMO you need read it.
GHW Bush was a hero in WW II but not after. Ever her of the$ 5-7million oil platform that disappeared and the insurance pay out of $11 million, and that is just for starters.
Now for Berlin, the thing I'm most proud of for my time in the Army is my Army of Occupation medal.
Respect the Flag first everyth9ng else after.
John I happen to respect your comments here very much. Your view points seems as steady as a rock, your judgement the same.
My problem with CIA is the fact they still avoid being responsible for some very serious transgressions. Forget about the JKF case for a moment, acknowledging Jefferson Morley's frustrations with me personally.
I read your comment to me in my notifications. I can not disagree with your take on things because I do agree and have little or no basis for criticisms.
But having CIA controlling foreign policy should be over with, IMO.
There was a time when I had lots of respect for GHW Bush, shot out of the air three times and still alive is no fluke.
However had the truth been known about his personal behavior with regards to shady incidents he was involved after graduating from Yale, I doubting he would have ran for president.
It is obvious to me you have a much greater personal knowledge of the changes at CIA than I. However judging from recent history I know about I have serious doubts about how affective any scrubbing might have been.
Safe to say you and I could spend hours discussing the subject matter here. I have an appetite for th information you have backing your opinions I simple at this point in time disagree with some of your assessments here.
I will not belabor the fact that we has a basic disagreement here. I'm thinking our opinions are pretty far apart on much of this. As a result and because I do respect your opinions I'd like to ask you a couple of questions that I really don't need answers to but as a way of you understanding where I'm coming from.
What got me so fired up about CIA and it's history is that CIA is very adapt at stimying investigations better left to law enforcement. NUMEC investigation curtailed because CIA stonewalling records, JFK and RFK attempts to get Zionist organizations and Israeli fundraising organizations curtailed because orders by JFK were ignored by LBJ. And then the investigations into USAEC about the diversion of highly enriched U-235 which CIA truncated by refusing to release documents which evidently implicated Commission members.
A move I believe used to protect folks who betrayed their county namely one JJ Angleton and others. (Tellr maybe). Read Roger Mattsons Book, Stealing the Atomic Bomb
Then the drug running, not an acceptable activity,IMO. CIA involving themselves in in cocaine trafficking because it served their purpose, flooded the country with the drug and filled numerous prisons in the process and nothing much has changed as a result that I can see. Then Russia gate NCA analysts and former
CIA members have refuted the claim. Russia didn't hack those emails they were
downloaded, IMO.
DEA personnel originally were a very many former CIA who got fired from CIA back when Stansfield Turner cleaned house there. This caused a very serious problem for the fledgling DEA. IMO. So, it seems to me if you do know about these issues you are willing to give CIA a pass.
One last Issue, are you familiar with the DRUGS, LAW ENFORCEMENT AND FOREIGN POLICY Report prepared by the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics and International Operations of the Committee on Foreign Relations United States Senate, ordered in 1987 and completed in 1989?
The report was better known as the Kerry Report. I have a copy and time and again CIA used it's leverage to deny the investigation very important records needed to properly chase the truth. Same as with the instances listed above.
Even if you have to hold your nose, no disrespect intended, IMO you need read it.
GHW Bush was a hero in WW II but not after. Ever her of the$ 5-7million oil platform that disappeared and the insurance pay out of $11 million, and that is just for starters.
Now for Berlin, the thing I'm most proud of for my time in the Army is my Army of Occupation medal.
Respect the Flag first everyth9ng else after.
John I happen to respect your comments here very much. Your view points seems as steady as a rock, your judgement the same.
My problem with CIA is the fact they still avoid being responsible for some very serious transgressions. Forget about the JKF case for a moment, acknowledging Jefferson Morley's frustrations with me personally.
I read your comment to me in my notifications. I can not disagree with your take on things because I do agree and have little or no basis for criticisms.
But having CIA controlling foreign policy should be over with, IMO.
There was a time when I had lots of respect for GHW Bush, shot out of the air three times and still alive is no fluke.
However had the truth been known about his personal behavior with regards to shady incidents he was involved after graduating from Yale, I'm doubting he would have ran for president.
It is obvious to me you have a much greater personal knowledge of the changes at CIA than I. However judging from recent history I know about I have serious doubts about how affective any scrubbing might have been.
Safe to say you and I could spend hours discussing the subject matter here. I have an appetite for the information you have backing your opinions an need to learn much more. I simply at this point in time disagree with some of your assessments here.
I will not belabor the fact that we has a basic disagreement here. I'm thinking our opinions are pretty far apart on much of this. As a result and because I do respect your opinions I'd like to ask you a couple of questions that I really don't need answers to but as a way of you understanding where I'm coming from.
What got me so fired up about CIA and it's history is that CIA is very adapt at stimying investigations better left to law enforcement. NUMEC investigation curtailed because CIA stonewalling records, JFK and RFK attempts to get Zionist organizations and Israeli fundraising organizations curtailed because orders by JFK & RFK were ignored by LBJ. The investigations into USAEC about the diversion of highly enriched U-235 which CIA truncated by refusing to release documents which evidently implicated Commission members.
A move I believe used to protect folks who betrayed their county namely one JJ Angleton, but in my opinion there are others. (Teller maybe). Read Roger Mattsons Book, Stealing the Atomic Bomb
Then the drug running, not an acceptable activity,IMO. CIA involving themselves in in cocaine trafficking because it served their purpose, flooded the country with the drug and filled numerous prisons in the process and nothing much has changed as a result that I can see. Then Russia gate former NSA and former
CIA analysts have refuted the claim. Russia didn't hack those emails they were
downloaded, IMO.
DEA personnel originally were a very many former CIA who got fired from CIA back when Stansfield Turner cleaned house there. This caused a very serious problem for the fledgling DEA. IMO and facilitated illegal activities by CIA. It seems to me if you do know about these issues you are willing to give CIA and NSA a pass. I not so forgiving.
One last Issue, are you familiar with the DRUGS, LAW ENFORCEMENT AND FOREIGN POLICY. Report prepared by the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics and International Operations of the Committee on Foreign Relations United States Senate, ordered in 1987 and completed in 1989?
The report was better known as the Kerry Report. I have a copy and time and again CIA used it's leverage to deny the investigation very important records needed to properly chase the truth. Same as with the instances listed above.
Even if you have to hold your nose, no disrespect intended, IMO you need read it.
GHW Bush was a hero in WW II but not after. Ever hear of the $ 5-7million oil platform that disappeared and the insurance pay out of $11 million, and that is just for starters.
Now for Berlin, the thing I'm most proud of for my time in the Army is my Army of Occupation medal, something now that is deemed taboo by many.
Respect the Flag first everything else after.
Yes, and Clinton and Obama have never been shot in the head, unlike Jack and Bobby.
Of course, Trump was shot, but it was just a flesh wound. He got the message.
I'm not making light of your comment, no criticism or argument from me here.
Just a short comment I've encountered elsewhere.
"When the new POTUS is given his National Security briefing they take him to a darkened room and show his a version of the JFK murder never seem by the public."
The message is made to be clearly understood. I'm just saying . . . .!
IMO with RFK's demise the "Company" had shot one sitting President for his beliefs and shot his brother running for president because he was very likely to win the election.
Why? MHO is that they new a good Catholic guy from a large very rich family would have definitely found out what happened or they would have had to shot a second elected president who happened to be JFK's brother.
It is exactly at this point in time CIA made it clearly known to the public they were not willing to take any chances on getting caught.
Couldn't shoot Nixon, one sitting president too many, so they drove him crazy instead. It was a short trip for "Trickey Dick"! Couldn't shoot Obama because of racial concerns about starting a race war.
BTW Ed who is this trump fellow anyhow? Could it be the NSA et. al. have regressed?
Curious folks want to know, it is getting later every minute.