Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Jackie O believed Johnson killed JFK

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
 
Ichingcarpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 02:24 AM
Original message
Jackie O believed Johnson killed JFK
Source: The Sun

EXPLOSIVE tapes by John F Kennedy's wife Jackie Onassis reveal she believed vice-president Lyndon B Johnson was behind his assassination. The recordings show she thought her husband's successor and Texas businessmen plotted with gunman Lee Harvey Oswald.

They also suggest that JFK was having an affair with a White House intern. But Jackie - who later married Greek shipping tycoon Aristotle Onassis - admits to cheating with actor William Holden and Fiat boss Gianni Agnelli.

Leading historian Arthur Schlesinger Jnr recorded the tapes with her months after her husband was shot in 1963.
Jackie, who died in 1994, banned their release until 50 years after her death. But her daughter Caroline is said to have unveiled them early to ABC in exchange for the US TV network dropping a drama on the Kennedys.

Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3739218/Jacki...
Refresh | +76 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
Ruby the Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 02:30 AM
Response to Original message
1. Whoa.
:wow:

Why would Caroline release them now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Tunkamerica Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 02:53 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. It says in the "article"
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ruby the Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 04:25 AM
Response to Reply #2
17. That makes no sense.
It would if ABC had the exclusive, but they didn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Tunkamerica Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 04:33 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. According to the article she unveiled them early to get ABC to drop the Kennedy's
it didn't say they had an exclusive. Who knows why ABC didn't run with it early. Maybe once she "unveiled" to them she unveiled to others. Perhaps their was a leak or ABC didn't have time to put the story together. Any number of things could have happened between then and now. Just because we don't know the details doesn't mean it doesn't make sense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ruby the Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:04 AM
Response to Reply #18
21. I don't disagree, but according to the UK Mirror link below, both US
and UK media had already run the Katie Holmes series, or at least the beginning episodes of it.

I guess I can partially get the whole 'stop it now and don't air any more episodes' schtick, but then again, I don't.

What on earth could ABC have uncovered that would be worse than leaking Jackie O tapes (that she required sealed until 2044) with her, in her own voice, accusing LBJ with complicity in JFK's murder?

This just fuels the story (where the Katie Holmes show was a big *yawn*)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Tunkamerica Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:15 AM
Response to Reply #21
26. requested, there were better ways to require it than by requesting it
and I'm pretty sure it was killed on the network and moved to a cable channel before it aired. I can't be certain since I work 2nd shift and would've been at work at the time, but that's what I remember.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ruby the Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:21 AM
Response to Reply #26
29. Thats what I mean
It wasn't like the show was new and legacy killing information, so why do this and why now? MUCH love and even MORE respect for Caroline K-S - but I don't get it.

Will have to wait and see how it all fleshes out, I guess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Tunkamerica Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:39 AM
Response to Reply #29
41. speaking as someone without cable, keeping it off abc if it was damaging to the family name might
have seemed worth it. And another poster pointed out that Caroline might have felt the only person being protected was herself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ruby the Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:50 AM
Response to Reply #41
48. With mind blowing accusations (and admissions) as this purports
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 05:56 AM by Ruby the Liberal
and as nothing of note remains publically active of the Kennedy power brand right now, I am not seeing the logic.

Then again, I am not walking in her shoes, and I don't have a family legacy to think about given that all of my immediate relatives are gone and it is just me - so will give her that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:37 AM
Response to Reply #41
71. Now, before I fully show my ignorance, I've been off the cable teat for over a decade,
but I thought with the dawn of digital TV, one can't even get the original three stations without cable anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
joeglow3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:35 AM
Response to Reply #71
107. Area Man Constantly Mentioning He Doesn't Own A Television
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #107
131. Cute but you missed my point
I thought that as of a few years ago,antennas would no longer bring in the three originals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
drm604 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #131
147. Not really true.
As far as I know they are all now broadcasting a digital signal in the same areas that had an analog signal before. You have to have a digital TV or tuner of course and I have heard that in some areas there are problems with some of the digital signals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
EC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #131
206. With a converter box you can still use the antennas
and get all kinds of stations including the regular networks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
joeglow3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #131
224. I understood your blatant point
I was referring to the second intended point made with how you conveyed it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:38 PM
Response to Reply #224
254. Oh, you think I'm preening with purity for not having cable?
I spend twice the time I might have spent goofing off in front of the TV in front of this stupid computer. I didn't care to be excoriated if I was wrong and rabbit ears still work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
CBGLuthier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 11:16 AM
Response to Reply #71
179. original three is a very obsolete concept. OTA TV is alive and mostly well.
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 11:16 AM by CBGLuthier
PBS was the fourth and Fox was the fifth and the other weblets have combined and recombined.

I use an antennae to receive over the air broadcast. I get all the old ones plus a lot of new ones. Most of the channels multicast.

Just to help me list them I receive

4-1 NBC
4-2 Weather Stuff
4-3 AntennaTV more or less a tvland kind of sub network.
5-1 ABC affiliate
5-2 This TV. Movies and Outer LImits reruns and such
9-1 CBS
9-2 Reruns of 9-1 news broadcasts
13-1 PBS
13-2 Secondary PBS featuring previous nights programming and more
14-1 through 14-5 are all religous.
25-1 FOX TV
25-2 country music videos
34-1 Not sure who this is but they run Smallville
34-2 Music videos not country
43-1 another non network independent I think
52-1 local independant
52-2 Some kind of manly tv subnet
62-1 Ion TV
62-2 Qubo kidsTV
62-3 Ion Life a realy lame self help kind of channel

There are also a few Spanish language stations I do not use.

Also all of the primary stations are in HD.


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 11:21 PM
Response to Reply #179
325. That's nothing

We have people here who get secret channels through their dental implants.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:42 AM
Response to Reply #29
45. I saw the series "On Demand." It made up some stuff, like alleged conversations among
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 05:44 AM by No Elephants
Bobby, Jack and Joe that no one else would have known about.

Smearing dead people is not that hard.

Then again, how I managed to stay awake despite Katie Holmes' deadly acting still amazes me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ruby the Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:54 AM
Response to Reply #45
51. Isn't that the point?
Why it went straight to cable?

A bunch of "maybe this convo took place" or couldn't you imagine "this scene at the compound" interactions? Look, I have much love for the Kennedys and what they used their wealth to stand up for, but even I wouldn't have gone near this nonsense out of curiosity.

Will wait and see, but remain shocked Caroline would release these 48 year old tapes a mere 17 years after Jackie's death.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:28 AM
Response to Reply #51
66. Not sure what you mean. Greg Kennear, who played JFK in it, claimed
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 06:30 AM by No Elephants
it had gone straight to cable because someone had put pressure on the network. Maybe he was only repeating speculation at the time, though.

On the other hand, "dramatization" of actual events never kept anything off a network after the network already contracted for it, as far as I know. Heck, even PBS produced and aired a hatchet job on the Kennedys. (Could have spit nails when I saw it. Venomous Midge Decter, to name just one, had a prominent role.)

So, here we have yet another Kennedy related mystery and maybe we'll never know what happened around that series, either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #66
144. Keep in mind Greg Kennear is a Right Wing shill however...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Lucinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #144
174. I thought he was a Dem? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #144
175. What makes you say he is a right wing shill?
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 11:15 AM by No Elephants
During the interview I saw him give on this topic, he seemed very annoyed, but I thought that was understandable. Still, I wondered. If he really is, too bad.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #175
221. I may be wrong - I am only reporting what I heard here
And it may have been false - all internet sources seem to place him as a dem
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #221
230. Ah. Not for nuttin', but I have read many false "facts" on this board.
And whether he is a Democrat or a right winger (or neither) is a matter of fact, not opinion.

Maybe because we are all Democrats, we don't ask for links as often as we may on other boards. At least I don't.


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
vets74 Donating Member (714 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-11 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #66
328. Covering the $44,000 paid to Ngo Dinh Diem's assassins is still forbidden.
You won't see Kinnear or anybody else objecting to Robert McNamara and Lyndon Johnson's version that Kennedy had nothing to do with it.

But there's nobody in a U.S. Embassy up for releasing an unauthorized paid hit. Not in 1963, not now.

Here's the bullshit version posted on wiki:


When rebel forces entered the palace, the Ng were not present, as they had escaped before to a loyalist shelter in Cholon. The brothers had kept in communication with the rebels through a direct link from the shelter to the palace, and misled them into believing that they were still in the palace. The Ng brothers soon agreed to surrender and were promised safe exile; after being arrested, they were instead executed in the back of an armoured personnel carrier by ARVN officers on the journey back to military headquarters at Tn Sơn Nhứt Air Base.

While no formal inquiry was conducted, the responsibility for the deaths of the Ng brothers is commonly placed on Minhs bodyguard, Captain Nguyễn Văn Nhung, and on Major Dương Hiếu Nghĩa, both of whom guarded the brothers during the trip. Minhs army colleagues and US officials in Saigon agreed that Minh ordered the executions. They postulated various motives, including that the brothers had embarrassed Minh by fleeing the Gia Long Palace, and that the brothers were killed to prevent a later political comeback. The generals initially attempted to cover up the execution by suggesting that the brothers had committed suicide, but this was contradicted when photos of the Ngs bloodied bodies surfaced in the media.


Funny-funny-Wiki-funny

Thing is, the U.S. Embassy paid these two killers $44,000 in cash prior to the move on the residence. This Wiki story fails the ha-ha test.

Blaming the assassination on "Big Minh" is typical McNamara/Johnson. You will never see corporatist press or entertainment media cover top-level lying -- surely not where a president has two people/noncombatants/nonterrorists murdered.

The killing of Kennedy ?

Well, who would have had a worry after November 2, 1963, that he would be next in line for Kennedy ?

The next to see $44,000 on his head ? And why wait to see the James-Bond-reading Kennedy get bloodthirsty again ?

JFK's father had been a gangster during Prohibition. Getting people killed was assumed to be part of the family business. Castro, several of the Taiwanese, almost anyone at the top in oil countries that went away from the Americans... gets to be a long list.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:48 AM
Response to Reply #51
134. Maybe Caroline believes that they will be helpful to heal the wounds
in the hearts of those of us who clearly remember the events of that time.

The Kennedy assassination divided our country.

Many of us never trusted "the other side" ever again. Our generation deserves real answers to our many questions about what happened on that day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #134
139. definitely there was alot of info which was kept away from the
American people, and it is still relevant today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-09-11 11:57 PM
Response to Reply #134
264. That event is still connected to where we are today --
that was the rw political violence which permitted the rw to rise here --

and it's the only way the rw can rise --

well, that and stolen elections!


Trust Caroline may think that it will keep questions alive -- and supply

a bit of the answer?


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-09-11 11:50 PM
Response to Reply #51
263. Interested in why ...
you are "shocked" that Caroline is releasing the tapes?

I'm mulling it over and always like to info coming out --

but wondering if rw will find a way to blunt the info --

highlight the affairs -- whatever -- ?


And, if holding the tapes would have put Caroline in danger -- or whether

releasing them puts her in danger?


Doubt the tapes were a surprise to the rw -- ?

Mrs. Kennedy told us quite clearly and immediately what the wounds were --

certainly nothing that could have been created from shots from behind --

especially from the angle of the window where Oswald would have had to be

hanging out of the window to do it.

Also surprised that Mrs. Kennedy seems to be linking LBJ and Oswald --

and actually I think she probably, but perhaps not at the moment she did

the tapes, had the full story from various investigations. Bobby Kennedy

sent someone in during the first 24 hours who couldn't penetrate it -- but

said very powerful coup.

And think that Onassis had it investigated.

Think the private investigators did a fantastic job -- overall.

Pieces of info from everywhere made it clear what happened.

Think Madelain Brown has been invaluable in revealing the truth of LBJ.


However, it seems also that the night of the assassiantion those in DC pretty

much had the names of the plotters on their lips and well knew what had gone down.



:hi:


Leading historian Arthur Schlesinger Jnr recorded the tapes with her months after her husband was shot in 1963.
Jackie, who died in 1994, banned their release until 50 years after her death. But her daughter Caroline is said to have unveiled them early to ABC in exchange for the US TV network dropping a drama on the Kennedys.


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:21 AM
Response to Reply #29
102. Just a moment of learning here...this is 'cable important'.
That film, on ABC, would have had say, 5-12 million viewers in the first run. That is the 'not a big hit' scale. Cable, maybe 400,00 people. Maybe. This is important stuff when looking at tv media in general. Big, Big Numbers in Cable = 1-3 million. That's the top. The top in Network Broadcast is in the 20-40 million range.
This is true for Kennedy show, for Hannity, for all cable. It is small time compared to networks. That is aside from the very real 'cache' that network TV still has. People see the Networks as 'valid' and Cable as 'rouge'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
liberalmike27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #102
156. That Kennedy Series
Saw it on Netflix the other day. Didn't bother to watch, knowing it was a slasher piece.

It's weird how some people don't understand a person can be both good, and bad at the same time. You hear people describe Huey Long as a corrupt politician, yet he did so much good for Louisiana, for the poor and working people. He ushered in public education there, taxed Standard Oil for it.

A little clue--they are all somewhat corrupt--our system is completely corrupt, and that is even if you do everything strictly legally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RKP5637 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #156
170. I watched the whole series. It was a compilation of things I already knew for
the most part. I agree with you so much, "they are all somewhat corrupt--our system is completely corrupt, and that is even if you do everything strictly legally." People expect people to be Gods, they aren't, and too many people are hero worshipers with no brains connected and are delusional IMO.


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 11:16 AM
Response to Reply #170
180. I thought the things they added had a right wing slant.
Things that they made up, like conversations among family members.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RKP5637 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #180
183. Agree, it certainly wasn't flattering. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:03 AM
Response to Reply #180
266. Yes -- obvious how anxious the rw still is to try to demonize JFK -- poweful liberal legacy!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:01 AM
Response to Reply #156
265. Huey Long also played some role in pushing Social Security, I think?
but interesting what a threat he is to the rw as any kind of a

populist hero -- !!

And, it also looks like his death was a hit?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Raschel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #29
133. I don't get it either. But that Caroline sure emulates her mother in carrying herself with dignity!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #21
130. Maybe ABC was just making stuff up and Caroline wanted
the true story, not ABC's false one, before the public.

A lie can become so widely accepted that the truth is rejected. That may have been Caroline's fear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SemperEadem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:00 AM
Response to Reply #130
143. for real.. especially in this day and age
I'm sure Caroline would not have done it if she didn't have good, sound reasons for it. After all, she did cowrite that book on privacy and she of all the Kennedys has stayed mainly out of the media spotlight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 03:00 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. Wouldn't this be about time to wake up the nation?
We've had 50 years of rw political violence which has brought us to this

point --

They didn't get FDR, but they weren't about to have another JFK/FDR begain

to gain control over the rw shift they had begun to put in place --

from Project Paperclip to McCarthy Era and their purge of liberals from government.


JFK also ran on a Democratic Party Platform which called for the NATIONALIZING

of the oil industry -- imagine the suffering that would have prevented for our

nation and the planet!!

JFK was also ending the oil depletion allowance which so profited those who control

our natural resources/oil -- !!



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tblue37 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 04:09 AM
Response to Reply #4
14. Keep in mind that LBJ was the architect of the Great Society.
He was himself in the tradition of FDR.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:00 AM
Response to Reply #14
141. LBJ was backed by Brown & Root -- which is now a part of
Halliburton. LBJ gave Brown & Root (Halliburton), which was at that time a cement company, government contracts including contracts for paving areas of Viet Nam during the war there.

Later we developed no-bid contracts and a co-dependency between Halliburton and our military.



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-09-11 11:28 PM
Response to Reply #141
260. Also Brown & Root were given a contract to dredge one of the VN waterways ...
Edited on Tue Aug-09-11 11:28 PM by defendandprotect
Cam Ranh Bay --

Think it was a $1 billion contract!!

.History Unfolding: Echoes from the fifties
(Brown and Root, which later won a contract to dredge Cam Ranh Bay in Vietnam, is now part of Halliburton.) ... Supreme Court challenge--he has now given up on ...

http://historyunfolding.blogspot.com/2011/02/echoes-fro...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #14
189. The Great Society surpassed anything FDR wanted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
dotymed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #189
220. While "the Great Society" was very important and helpful
to Americans, especially concerning equality and race acceptance, IMO, it did not come close to "surpassing anything FDR wanted."

Before his death, FDR was pushing a "Second Bill of Rights" that would have given us universal health care and insured the continued financial regulation of "The New Deal." That plus a lot more.

FDR is the reason that the other "civilized nations" have the health care systems and strong Unions that they have. The Marshal Plan was based on the "Second Bill of Rights" that FDR wanted Americans to adopt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-09-11 11:31 PM
Response to Reply #220
261. Thank you -- +1000% ---
Edited on Tue Aug-09-11 11:33 PM by defendandprotect
Truman tried to pas sthe health care -- don't know how seriously he tried --

but doctors at the time allegedly were against it -- ???


Always so much more to know about FDR -- love it when I have the time to read

about him and especially when I can read his own words -- !!!



I've also read that FDR wanted to NATIONALIZE the oil industry and asked LBJ's

advice on the matter -- LBJ advised him not to!!

Imagine the pain and suffering the nation could have been spared had FDR gone ahead -- !!

Today -- according to Al Gore in Rolling Stone -- the OIL and COAL industries control

our Congress!







:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
dotymed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 07:46 AM
Response to Reply #261
287. I believe that most of us, thought we had found a "new
FDR" when the eloquent candidate Obama spoke.

We sure found out differently when President Obama took over and never looked back. What a fucking shame.

All of that appeasement is now kicking him in the ass.
"hey. I know, let's hire the crookedest banksters we can find to handle this crash...they did it, they can fix it..."

Don't worry about getting rid of the bush DOJ appointees...

Honestly, and it gets even worse. I worked my ass off for "change" and that is about all I have, a few pennies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 12:06 AM
Response to Reply #287
288. I did vote for Obama --
Edited on Thu Aug-11-11 12:07 AM by defendandprotect
but really only because there was no place else to go after it became obvious

that a populist wasn't going to make it -- and tried to be optimistic about it.

I was never able to listen to Obama -- and that should have warned me.

One of my main concerns was about the DLC -- and now turns out Obama was "New Dem" --

and these three years have shown him way to the right with a pro-corporate agenda --

or even worse a Koch Bros. agenda as far as Social Security is concerned!


Feel very badly for the people here who I know worked so hard to elect this man --

DU'ers at the very end when Obama was going off to the White House gave him another

$280,000!!! And presume much more before that? And they have not one iota of

leverage over him -- his allegiance is completely to elites - and likely to the

dreaded Third Way!!

Bush DOJ appointees also disturbs me very much -- but not sure if even any progress

at all has been made there? Frightening situation!


Also noticed that Thom Hartmann was pushing the idea that some here are also pushing ---

hold your nose and vote for Obama because of the Supreme Court -- !!

Well, if we can't trust Obama on Social Security and Medicare, how could we possibly

trust him re new appointees to the Supreme Court?

We couldn't trust him on universal health care, either --

Or the Patriot Act --

Or tax cuts for the rich --

Or Social Security Cola's --

Wiretapping --

but we can trust him to handle the Supreme Court?



:nuke:


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
dotymed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #288
309. I agree 110% defendandprotect.
After the demolition of Kucinich, I worked hard for Obama. It was a huge mistake.

No repeat here. I do pray for a primary by Sanders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 11:35 PM
Response to Reply #309
310. We are thinking, it seems, exactly alike --
Will be watching for you --

keep on tellin' it --


:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-09-11 11:20 PM
Response to Reply #14
259. True -- but he was also a co-conspirator in the coup on JFK and our people's government --!!
Edited on Tue Aug-09-11 11:22 PM by defendandprotect
They could not have done it without having the protection of the presidency --

If you're not familiar with his mistress Madelaine Brown, you'll find her videos

on YouTube --

On one of them she describes the evening before the assassination and a dinner party

she attended at Clint Murchinson's the night before the assassination --

After the dinner -- a large number of males arrived at the house, separately --

and attended a private meetting in another part of the house. LBJ also arrived.

Long list of names which I don't have at hand. But she lists them on the tape.

Hoover was there.

After the meeting, as LBJ was leaving he whispered in Madelaine Brown's ear in very

angry voice that "JFK would never embarrass him again -- that's not a threat, it's a promise!"


It also happened that the journalist Helen Thomas happened to be at the dinner that

evening at the house -- and also noted the arrival of the men. The morning after

the assassination she filed an Affadavit naming the men who had been at the

Murchinson home and the meeting they held.


LBJ was a very violent man -- though it was well hidden from the public -- except that

as time went on he developed a compulsion to confess -- in fact, Pierre Salinger said

that he and Bill Moyers considered LBJ to be "clinically psychotic" while he was in the

White House. Though I've never heard Bill Moyers discuss it.

They finally decided to hrie a psychiatrist and pay him $1 million to listen to LBJ's

secrets and to keep them secret.

Good book on all of that -- Blood, Money & Power by Barr McClellan -- my library had it.

McClellan worked for law firm employed by LBJ -






Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Raksha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #4
145. That's my thought too.
Re "Wouldn't this be about time to wake up the nation?"

She may be trying to save her country, assuming it isn't already too late. If this won't do it, nothing will.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:09 AM
Response to Reply #145
267. American citizens aren't political -- and don't really connect with the truth of rw evils ....
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 12:11 AM by defendandprotect
Or the depth of it -- !!

They don't get up every morning trying to figure out how to gain control

over others -- and rip them off -- even murder them -- so they are ill-matched

for figuring out this level of evil -- imo.



They are told that Hitler/Nazis/fascism were an aberration ---

and that we won WWIi and it's over --

but neither is true -- !!


We immediaely had Mrs. Kennedy telling us what happened -- and her

info was blunted by the press -- and played down by Warren Report.

Anxious to see how this plays out --



:hi:



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RKP5637 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #4
173. The good all die young thanks to violent and evil RW America! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:12 AM
Response to Reply #173
268. +1000%
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
liberalmike27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #1
148. Well Read a Book
Claiming his lifetime lawyer that always got him out of jams hired this guy they'd used before to shut up people, and shot him from a culvert near the highway. I forget his name, the shooter, but it was fairly convincing.

Odd thing is, reading the more legitimate Karo series on Johnson, which as far as I can tell so far (stuck halfway through Master of Senate, huge book) after reading the first two in the series, clearly Johnson had the ambition since he was 5 years-old, and he thought he was near death, and that he would not have another chance.

As much as I hate to think it possible, it occurred in Texas, Johnson had a lifetime of buds there, and connections with a lot of folks. He only needed one. No matter how they dress it up, there were a lot of details that the eyewitnesses didn't seem to square up.

OK, got the book, it was Blood, Money, $ Power, by Barr McClellan (Scott's father I believe, mom's in politics too). Mac Wallace, he says was in the book depository, and he refers to the guy by the highway as "Junior," though I'm not sure if he ever mentions the guy name and I've already wasted more time on this that it deserves, so...

Anyway, like I've said from reading far more legitimate stuff than conspiracy books on Johnson, I think the man, and his cohorts were infinitely capable of doing it. Did they? Who knows? Johnson acted like such a bastard just after he was shot, trying to get Jackie in the shot to claim more legitimacy, which is weird if you think about it. It's as if he'd already thought of everything he needed to do. And he was really pushing for a quick sign-in, so he'd but heading everything up, to direct any investigation quickly, but I guess you'd do that anyway.

It's an interesting read.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Samantha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #148
165. It is a great read and I believe Johnson was behind it as well
I have for years, but I also believe there was a net of people who knew it was going to happen and wanted it to happen. There is no other explanation I have heard concerning that one fingerprint found in the other sniper's nest at the book depository (I think it was 3 floors below where Oswald sat in waiting). That unidentified fingerprint was sent to a French expert analyst with absolutely no mention of the crime to which the print was attached. Months later, he had managed to identify it and returned that identification to the author. It did belong to the person Barr had suspected Johnson would engage to assassinate Kennedy, the man had a criminal record and had performed other "dirty" jobs for Johnson.

Johnson and Kennedy despised each other. But when the scandals heated up investigating Johnson as he sat in the office of the Vice President of the United States, Johnson feared criminal prosecution. He knew the only escape was to promote himself into the presidency, and if he developed a plan that succeeded, he would also eliminate a political rival he detested. It was a win, win situation for him.

Jackie Kennedy hired private French investigators to learn the truth about her husband's death. That report was given to her months later, and she made arrangements to release it to the public 50 years after her death. I believe she wanted to protect John and Caroline. It made me sad to read this because I knew I would not live long enough to learn what the French investigators found.

I believe Robert Kennedy knew he would never learn the truth about his brother's death without running for and winning the Office of the Presidency. He also despised Johnson, and I feel this is why Robert Kennedy was assassinated, the people involved could not allow for the possibility Robert Kennedy would win the election and move into position to acquire all the information he wanted about the details of his brother's death.

But the History Channel publicized a lot of the information contained in Barr McClellan's book, and it caused an absolute fury to the Johnson family. The History Channel was required to give equal time for a airing of the opinions of historians who could refute the information McClellan had asserted. I watched that refutation. It did not address any, not one, of the facts revealed in the book but rather focused on Johnson's achievements in the White House and asserted he could not possibly have been involved in anything like this.

Interesting thread. Thanks for alerting us to this information.

Sam
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
shanti Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #165
192. hmmm, interesting
i wonder how the johnson family is taking this...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:27 AM
Response to Reply #192
270. As I understand it, Carter and Ford also got involved in pressuring the History Channel ...
and as a result the series was never shown again on the History Channel --

which was taken over by another company!

Fortunately, some part of the series exists on YouTube!!

And I think many Americans have copies of it from the airings of the programs?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
AntiFascist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #165
252. The book: "Farewell America: The Plot to Kill JFK"...

was supposedly written by French investigators cooperating with Jackie and RFK, and was to be used to aid RFK's run for presidency and reopen the investigation into the assassination once RFK was elected. The investigators included: Andre Ducret of the Surete, Interpol, others in French Intelligence and Philippe Vasjoly, chief French petroleum agent in the US. Texas oil magnate HL Hunt is mentioned prominently in the book. According to the wiki entry for HL Hunt:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H._L._Hunt

"Before Kennedy's inauguration, Hunt's "Facts Forum" was putting out religious appeals as to why Kennedy should not be permitted to enter the White House. The program had previously attacked Jews and supported Joseph McCarthy. On the eve of the assassination, Hunt's various outlets were spewing hateful material about the president. He thought Kennedy was weak on communism and knew Kennedy wanted to tax oil wealth, almost like other forms of wealth. Hunt also viewed democracy as the devil's work. One of his sons helped pay for a large Dallas newspaper ad attacking Kennedy that prompted the president to say they were entering "nut country." Some of Hunt's literature was found in Ruby's pocket after he shot Oswald.

After the assassination, the FBI briefly provided agents to protect Hunt while he and General Edwin Walker repaired to a Hunt hide-away in Mexico. Hunt was an admirer of LBJ and had strong ties to the Cuban exile community. Hunt had connections with the Chicago mob, and Murchison had a joint business venture with Louisiana mobster Carlos Marcello. Mafia messenger Eugene Hale Brading visited H. L. Hunt's office on the morning of November 21. He was arrested in Dealey Plaza on November 22 and later released. John Curington, Hunt's former chief aid, said Ruby also visited Hunt on the 21st, and that Marina Oswald met with Hunt on the 20th. On the 23rd, Hunt instructed Curington to look into the kind of security the police had for Oswald."


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:34 AM
Response to Reply #252
271. Certainly, H. L. Hunt was involved -- though "out of town" at the time of the assassination ....
One of the first and best films, imo, to disclose the details/motives of the

assassination was "Executive Action" with Robert Ryan and Burt Landcaster --

There's another movie by that name -- coincidentally -- now --

Given how early it was made -- 1972? -- think it did an excellent job.


But would also highly recommend Oliver Stone's "JFK" --

Wonder if he will ever get to "LBJ" -- !!???



After the assassination, the FBI briefly provided agents to protect Hunt while he and General Edwin Walker repaired to a Hunt hide-away in Mexico. Hunt was an admirer of LBJ and had strong ties to the Cuban exile community. Hunt had connections with the Chicago mob, and Murchison had a joint business venture with Louisiana mobster Carlos Marcello. Mafia messenger Eugene Hale Brading visited H. L. Hunt's office on the morning of November 21. He was arrested in Dealey Plaza on November 22 and later released. John Curington, Hunt's former chief aid, said Ruby also visited Hunt on the 21st, and that Marina Oswald met with Hunt on the 20th. On the 23rd, Hunt instructed Curington to look into the kind of security the police had for Oswald."



The Democratic Platform that JFK ran on called for the nationalizing of the oil industry.

JFK was planning to end the oil depletion allowance --

LBJ/Murchinson/Oil and Mafia connections --

And, it was said that LBJ was even taking envelopes of cash pay-off's while he occupied

the White House!


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #148
185. Barr McClellan was a convicted forger, as well as being Scott McClellan's father.
Neither is a great credential. However, that does not mean he was lying about Johnson, for whom he had worked.

I have no idea how someone who supported JFK and worked for LBJ raises a son who works for Shrub. I just don't get it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:34 AM
Response to Reply #185
272. Think there was a divorce -- ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:23 AM
Response to Reply #148
269. Think you mean Mac Wallace--?? His fingerprint on "sniper's nest" -- ???
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 12:24 AM by defendandprotect
Some terrific info came out in the book by Barr McClellan --

"Blood, Power & Money" -- especially re Mac Wallace --

and Madelaine Brown also makes Wallace's role clear as he keep the pathway

clear for LBJ both personally and politically!


And other books have told this tale -- LBJ and violence -- well hidden!


But I don't think that the Caro books are more legitimate!

Robt. Caro started out well, but by the time he got to the book which should

have told all -- it didn't. Personally, I think the Johnson family either scared

him off which is the most likely, or bought him off which I think isn't likely.


See that you found the references .... I'll have to recheck and find out if there is

anything more on "Junior" by the highway -- but certainly Jack Ruby was there!

OK, got the book, it was Blood, Money, $ Power, by Barr McClellan (Scott's father I believe, mom's in politics too). Mac Wallace, he says was in the book depository, and he refers to the guy by the highway as "Junior," though I'm not sure if he ever mentions the guy name and I've already wasted more time on this that it deserves, so...


Don't think it's wasted time -- what happened on that day has brought us to where we are

now -- TRULY!! From Global Warming to the Congress being under the control of the oil and

coal industries!!

It does still matter -- it always will --






Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Horse with no Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #1
208. My best guess?
Maybe she was afraid if something happened to her...they might end up not getting released.
Maybe this is the first step in the push back AGAINST the powers that be.

Her kids are almost grown--perhaps she is ready to "fight that fight" now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:36 AM
Response to Reply #208
273. Arthur Schlesinger died at least a few years ago --
I'm wondering if that might have had something to do with it?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 02:56 AM
Response to Original message
3. Of course ....
Mrs. Kennedy believed that --

and of course LBJ was more than a co-conspirator --

The coup could not have gone forward without their having the presidency to

protect them --

Haven't actually read the article -- thank you for posting --

and have noticed that the control is over what is said about the coup seems to

be wholly in the hands of the rw now --

very little counter-programming so think Caroline was correct --

but presume this will create danger for her --

The very existence of JFK's children represented danger for the plotters ---



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 03:01 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. This makes it pretty clear. The same people are causing today's problems:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RKP5637 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #6
176. Thanks for posting, will watch!
:yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
shanti Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #6
194. and the original, for this interested
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z9WVZddH9w&feature=rela...

thanks for your link. i'd never seen this before, but it seems many people already had.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
snooper2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:31 AM
Response to Reply #3
126. Have you ever tried holding the Shift key down when you hit Return?
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
BackToThe60s Donating Member (266 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 03:00 AM
Response to Original message
5. I can't find any backup for this tale
And that includes the ABC News website. Nothing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 03:06 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. Wait. Give it time. This is the kind of thing our media eats up.
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 03:12 AM by No Elephants
And, saying "The Sun reported...." makes it a true statement.

No danger of a libel suit* if you're only quoting a report made by someone else.

* In this case, maybe libel would not be a problem anyway. I don't think anyone can sue for damage to reputation on behalf of a deceased person. Jackie, Schlessinger, Johnson, all disqualified.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
BackToThe60s Donating Member (266 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 03:12 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. LOL, not even DRUDGE is carrying this!
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:10 AM
Response to Reply #9
23. I heard it on NBC tv this morning.
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 05:20 AM by No Elephants
When I said "Give it time," I meant more than six minutes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ruby the Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:24 AM
Response to Reply #23
32. !
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
dipsydoodle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 03:29 AM
Response to Reply #5
12. Daily Mail here in the UK is running it too
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 03:49 AM by dipsydoodle
Explosive Jackie O tapes 'reveal how she believed Johnson killed JFK and had affair with movie star'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2023418/Jackie-...

:shrug:

Looks like ABC intend to show it in the US and one of our channels over here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
1776Forever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:20 AM
Response to Reply #12
121. Thank you for link! Says ABC and BBC will be doing a show on this!....
A programme featuring the tapes will be aired by U.S. network ABC, and it is understood British broadcasters are in talks to show it here too.
ABC executives claimed the tapes revelations were explosive.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2023418/Jackie-...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 04:13 AM
Response to Reply #5
16. Read a bit

James W Douglass published an up to date book in 2010 which supports this latest report. Mrs. Kennedy sent a private note to Kruschev.

"JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters" is the best book on President Kennedy's assassination to date.

http://www.amazon.com/JFK-Unspeakable-Why-Died-Matters/...


Also go to the mary ferrel website for some basic background.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
fasttense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:27 AM
Response to Reply #16
34. I prefer "Legacy of Secrecy" - a book on the JFK, MLK and Bobby murders.
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 05:29 AM by fasttense
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118027763

Legacy of Secrecy uses actual evidence, something a lot of the other books I've read lacked. It's pretty clear, from the interviews and files, that organized crime assassinated JFK/MLK and Bobby. They covered it up because they thought Castro was behind it and were afraid of a WW III what with the Bay of Pigs and all.

There was supposedly a movie in the making but I haven't heard much about the movie recently.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:53 AM
Response to Reply #34
50. There were many things the Mafia could not do
Like change routes, manage the coverup....

Have you read JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He died and Why It Matters? It is recent, has the advantage of recent discoveries.

The Marcello family are rather clownish. RFK deported Carlos Marcello to Guatemala once, which made Carlos angry.

James Angleton, the CIA Counterintelligence chief, had some contacts with Trafficante and other Mafioso. But Actually Oliver Stone's JFK pretty much got things right. The Mafia hadn't the power to cover things up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Raschel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:00 AM
Response to Reply #34
142. Three assassinations in such a short time. Even if you're not into conspiracy theories, it's hard to
not ponder that there's a connection.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
roxiejules Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #142
211. And the recent claim by Sirhan that he was a Manchurian Candidate
Robert F. Kennedy's assassin 'was a real-life Manchurian Candidate' - The Telegraph 3/2/11

Robert F. Kennedy's assassin was programmed to shoot the politician in a real life version of the film The Manchurian Candidate, according to his lawyer.



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #211
218. Not sure I buy that.
However, I would like to know who changed RFK's route so that he left the ballroom through the kitchen, where Sirhan was waiting with a gun.

I read or heard somewhere within the last five years that that was a last minute change, but the announcer of the program never said who instigated the change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:44 AM
Response to Reply #211
275. Very plausible. ... including fact that the CIA guy in charge of the program was at ballroom ....
His name was something like Johannides?

There's stuff on it on YouTube -- and this was all uncovered quite some time ago.

And, deep hypnotic suggest such as Sirhan obvious underwent require complete

control over the subject -- and usually some torture!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #34
187. If the evidence is clear that organized crime was behind all three killings,
why did people who had access to the evidence think Castro was behind it?

And who was supposed to start WWIII, Castro?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
dflprincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:56 PM
Response to Reply #187
255. I never bought into the idea that Castro had anything to do with it
mainly because, he isn't stupid (he wouldn't have lasted this long if he was). Supposedly, Castro thought JFK was someone he might be able to communicate with in his second term.

The CIA & the mob have been hand in glove since WWII when the CIA was still the OSS. The Mafia lost a lot of money when Castro threw them out of Cuba and not only was the CIA embarrassed by Castro, MIC whose interests they protect had lost some of their interests when Castro took power. I seem to recall that members of the Bush family (the Walker branch) lost a lot of money there.

Any finger pointing at Castro may have been done in the hopes of inflaming the public against him - not unlike it being implied that Sadaam Hussein had something to do with 9/11.


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
AntiFascist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-09-11 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #255
258. Recently evidence has been uncovered...

that the counter-intelligence division of the CIA had an interest in Oswald prior to the assassination. Immediately following the assassinaton, a CIA-funded (counter-intel) anti-Castro organization, called the DRE, published material attempting to link Oswald with Castro in the hopes of motivating the public to call for another invasion of Cuba. It seems that certain Democrats, such as Jim Garrison, were instead drawing attention to ultra right-wing government operatives as being behind the conspiracy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:49 AM
Response to Reply #255
277. Castro considered JFK a very positive force for democracy ....
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 12:56 AM by defendandprotect
and during that time we had JFK, Pope John XXIII who was turning the RCC into

a democracy -- and Krushev -- and Castro -- and pretty sure they were dealing

personally with Castro --

Castro immediately recognized the hit as a coup -- by the rw here --


Obviously LBJ/Bush/OIL/MIC/CIA/Angleton/Hoover --

Couldn't have been done without LBJ, however -- and he had every motive, of course!



Any finger pointing at Castro may have been done in the hopes of inflaming the public against him - not unlike it being implied that Sadaam Hussein had something to do with 9/11.


True -- and the secondary idea was that if anyone was noticing that the whole truth

was not being told -- that it even looked like a COVER UP -- then the back up alibi was that

actually Castro had plotted the coup on JFK but if the American public became aware of

that fact they would demand that Castro/Cuba be bombed out of existence -- i.e., WWIII --

cause certainly Soviets would jump in -- !!!

Actually the Warren Report was written by a CIA/ex-Nazi propagandist was I recall --



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:47 AM
Response to Reply #187
276. No -- it was an alternate CIA coverup story -- which was that there was a "cover up"
but it was to HIDE the fact that Castro had plotted the attack on JFK

-- and the fear behind it being that if it wasn't covered up then the

American public would demand that we bomb Cuba out of existence!


Actually the Warren Commission report was written by a CIA/ex Nazi propagandist

if I recall correctly -- !!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:41 AM
Response to Reply #34
274. Organized crime only exists by approval of elites -- they did not do it -- may have contributed ...
but this was not their coup --

And Oliver Stone's "JFK" makes that reasons why clear -- as many others have made

it clear over the decades -- the Mafia didn't have the power to do any of the things

that had to be done -- from changing JFK's route to calling off his Secret Service

guards -- from sending Oswald to Russia to bringing him back --

From controlling the autopsy to appointing the Warren Commission --


The coup could not have been pulled off without having LBJ in the presidency to

protect it -- and keep it covered up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Delphinus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:02 AM
Response to Reply #16
57. Read that book
MIC seemed to be the major motivating force - peace with Cuba and Russia? Not when there's a war machine to feed!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Enthusiast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:52 AM
Response to Reply #57
76. When we consider the emphasis
Eisenhower placed on the dangers inherent in the military industrial complex this motive must be given some credence.

Eisenhower would go out of his way to warn the entire population of this threat. Eisenhower didn't place as much emphasis on the threat of communism as he did the MIC. Maybe he actually felt the MIC was the greater threat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
loudsue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #76
155. And Eisenhower has been proven right: the MIC has been the downfall of the USA
Unbridled, unregulated capitalism is a curse on humanity, the environment, freedom and justice.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #76
199. He should know. He devoted his life to being part of it.
And that is the problem I have with Eisenhower warning us to beware of the MIC on his last day as President, in his farewell speech.

West Point, Army, 8 years as President, during all of which time he did not a thing to interfere with the MIC. On his last day, he makes this statement and everyone reveres him for it. (Not saying you are revering him for it, but I sure have seen that.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Enthusiast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #199
204. I think he was alarmed by the power
and influence of the MIC. He might have felt it rivaled or exceeded his own as POTUS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #204
216. So? He did nothing. He warned us? What the hell were we supposed to do about it if the POTUS
cum five star general felt powerless in comparison? Not as though we can vote out the Pentagon, is it? We can only vote for a head of the Executive Branch and hope he or she does the right thing. Besides, as I said, his entire life to that point had been part of the MIC.

Sorry, I just can't give him props for saying that in his farewell address. Year one, two, three, four, five, six, or seven, maybe. Maybe even at the start of year 8, but his last day? Sorry, no kudos.

Ike did something similar about Joe McCarthy, namely, nothing but cover his own ass. Did zero to stop him or disparage him, just expanded the hell out of Executive Privilege so that he and his peeps were out of McCarthy's reach. And we are still living with the consequences of that expansion.

And a better friend General Motors and oil companies never had. He built the whole national highway system (out of the defense budget, no less) to help them sell cars and oil, but that is a different issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 01:14 AM
Response to Reply #204
281. Also, Fletcher Prouty tells us that IKE wanted to say -- "Military Industrial Intellienge Complex" .
and Intelligence was taken out twice after he put it into the draft twice --

PLUS IKE was a military man who would have understood military is to be under

civilian control --

and suddenly it was under corporate control --

Do we really want GE and Halliburton having control over our military?


And CIA was certainly a threat to IKE's presidency as we saw with U2 which he ordered

grounded for months before the Paris Peace Accords! They were jeopardized.

The U2 Gary Powers flight was purposefully flow in defiance of IKE's orders -- and

as Gary Power's told us, lots of info that should not have been on the plan was on it!!


Ike wasn't the first or last to be threatened by CIA -- certainly JFK was and all the

way thru Carter and forward when necessary --


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 01:08 AM
Response to Reply #199
280. Eisenhower, like many other presidents, was betrayed by CIA ....
on the U2 especially where he had instructed that it was not to be flown for

months before the Paris Peace talks which were in the end jeopardized.


Gary Powers tells us that contrary to all instructions, ID and other info was

on the plane - not his doing.

And many other incidents -- from JFK thru to Carter they are still being betrayed

by CIA.


While I am also anti anything military -- the idea of corporate control over our

military is something entirely different!!


And I think IKE would have seen the difference! PLUS IKE was also against dropping

atomic weapons on Japan!



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 01:04 AM
Response to Reply #76
279. Certainly Eisenhower was offering a "conspiracy theory" and according to Al Gore ...
in his Rolling Stone article -- "Congress is under the control of the OIL and

COAL industries" --

Certainly MIC played a large role -- VN was their reward --


But they could not have done it w/o LBJ who would have been in jail --

Certainly Hoover -- Angleton -- and Mafia played a role, following orders.

And the very violent Cuban exiles, of course who kept the cover up in place by

murdering witnesses! Oil industry/Bush --

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:58 AM
Response to Reply #57
278. OIL is a "national security" issue -- no oil/no war --
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 01:02 AM by defendandprotect
But they couldn't have done it without LBJ in White House --

and LBJ had every motive -- he was headed for jail!


Oil and Mafia are linked -- LBJ and Murchinson linked to Mafia --

Their rewardw was VN --


The 1960 Democratic Platform that JFK ran on called for the nationalizing of the

oil industry -- plus JFK was certainly ending the oil depletion allowance.


According to Al Gore in his Rolling Stone article -- "Congress is under the control

of the oil and coal industries" -- !!

Look who rose to power --

LBJ/Bush/Oil -- MIC still with us!

RW all the way --

Even a RW coup on Pope John XXIII's Vatican II which sought to turn make the RCC

a democracy!

The three together were very powerful forces for peace -- JFK - Kruschev -- Pope John XXIII --


and personal contacts with Castro.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Raksha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #16
213. Reading the Amazon reviews now.
I have never yet read a book on the Kennedy assassination, although I was seventeen when it happened and remember that day very well. I think it's time for me to read this one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 03:09 AM
Response to Original message
8. And, from the Department of Disingenuous Playwright Denials.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:01 AM
Response to Reply #8
115. What makes you think that is a denial or disingenous?
A very famous play. The plot is from the play we call the Scottish Tragedy, by Shakespeare, so who does what to whom was set down a few hundred years prior. Kick started many a major career, that piece of theater. Still produced on occasion. What's to deny or be disingenuous about? Seems to me she is saying that even if these new bits of information total to her play seeming 'correct' it was a matter of chance, not a matter of her genius. Because she lifted the plot, because the play is a version of another play.
I do not agree with you take on her at all. In fact, I take issue with such inferences given without reason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
pscot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #115
169. Methinks the lady doth protest too much
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 10:59 AM by pscot
At the time, IIRC, the play was regarded as a particularly vicious attack on LBJ. Dismissing it 40 years on as mere coincidence ignores the reality of that time. As for Jackie-O's suspicions, let's not forget that the Kennedy's held LBJ in very lo esteem. Of all the fantasies spun around Jack Kennedy's murder, the one's involving LBJ seemed the least plausible. I'm inclined to believe there was oil money behind the killing, but I think Russ Baker builds a better case against George H.W. Bush. Fact is, we'll probably never know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #115
195. I think a denial is a denial because it is. I did not give an inference.
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 12:41 PM by No Elephants
I flat out said her denial was disingnuous.

"I do not agree with you take on her at all. In fact, I take issue with such inferences given without reason."

Fine. Disagree. That is your prerogative. I exercised mine. You have a right to do the same.

Taking issue is fine, too, but this is a message board, not a court of law. People often post their opinions without explaining further. Moreover, in this instance, I thought the basis of my opinion was self-evident from the article to which I had linked.

I am familiar with Shakespeare's MacBeth, thank you. But--not that it matters for purposes of my original post-- that was not her only reference. She used parts of many plays. However, it was her choice to use MacBeth as her model for a play about Kennedy's assassination. No one forced it on her.

That choice of hers in itself said a lot about who she thought killed Kennedy. So did modeling her character on Lady Bird and LBJ and giving the MacBirds Texas accents. And then, there is the name of the play. With Lady Bird and Lynda Bird, is there any doubt which family she was likening to the MacBeths?

In theory, she wrote about the killing of an engineer. She did not have to make the killers like the Johnsons. That, too, was her choice. Claiming she never intended to imply or convey that Johnson was involved strains credulity.

Not sure what the rest of your post has to with whether her denial that she was implying Johnson had killed Kennedy was disingenuous or not.



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bonobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 03:14 AM
Response to Original message
10. Get ready to be kicked to the dungeon for being a CT'er, Jackie! NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Nostradammit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 03:26 AM
Response to Original message
11. Dude!
This would be a great time to let everyone know about the right-wing coup d'etat that
happened in this country in 1963.

Bunch of Texas businessmen, you say, Jackie?

Hmmmm...

Do we know of any particularly sleazy Texas businessmen?


Hmmmm...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 04:02 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. I think that would cause a constitutional crisis
Not that I'm saying that's a bad thing...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Nostradammit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 04:54 AM
Response to Reply #13
19. Throwing a handful of treasonous bastards in jail
for the rest of their miserable lives would cause a constitutional crises?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ruby the Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:06 AM
Response to Reply #19
22. What octogenarians do you suggest we hunt down?
Better - who is even still alive that could have been complicit in this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:17 AM
Response to Reply #22
27. Being an octagenarian does not give anyone immunity from criminal prosecution.
Octagenarian nazis, pedophile priests, KKK killers and the like have been hunted down.

Criminals not arrested before they die usually do escape justice (but not publicity).
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ruby the Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:29 AM
Response to Reply #27
36. No question.
Just ask the Ohio Nazi bastard they ID'd and took to Europe for charges in what, 2009? 2010?

Point taken, but honestly - who connected to this is even still alive? This was too high profile, IMO. Anyone near the periphery of it has been pushing daisies for decades.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:01 AM
Response to Reply #36
55. Hence the part of my post, that addresses arrests of dead people.
Of course, all the deaths between the assasination and release of the Warren Commission report, starting with Oswald's, are themselves interesting to ponder--and many, many people have done so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Nostradammit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:32 AM
Response to Reply #22
37. Ah hell, I dunno - got to be at least one of them drawing breath
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ruby the Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:52 AM
Response to Reply #37
78. Damn - I gotta brush up on my CTs
Is this for real?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 07:44 AM
Response to Reply #78
87. Watch the video at link then get back to me
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 07:47 AM by Mimosa
At the link is a handy little primer of a video.

http://celticrebel.wordpress.com/2007/11/12/poppy-bush-... /

Also, a great book "Family of Secrets: The Bush Dynasty, America's Invisible Government, and the Hidden History of the Last Fifty Years" by Russ Baker. It's available on Kindle, too:

http://www.amazon.com/Family-Secrets-Americas-Invisible...

( Baker is a British journalist, I believe. American journalists are too scared of certain powers.) ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:19 AM
Response to Reply #78
119. Not only that, but he's probably the only person in the country who
"doesn't remember" where he was that day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #119
190. And didn't his kids say that they do not remember him watching it
one tv with them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #190
229. Well, since Shrub claimed twice to have been watching TV when the twin towers were hit, I would not
put much stock in his recollections of his tv viewing.

But no one would have watch the assassination itself on TV, at least not in real time. Films of it later, maybe. If anything, they would have watched the events in the days following the day of the assassination.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #229
238. We were watching it before the President dies because the first
announcement we concerning his being shot - not his death. So it was soon after. As to jr's memory - who knows.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #238
239. Oh, you mean you were watching the news, not the assassination itself.
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 02:17 PM by No Elephants
Were you watching Conkrite, the famous video they always show?

EDIT. I mean Cronkite. (I could not be a worse typist if I tried.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #239
243. Yes, we were. Watched the whole week until after the funeral and
missed Oswald being shot! Wouldn't you know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #78
210. His son Neil was also friends with Reagan's shooter's brother
Impossible coincidence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #37
137. seeing him makes you wonder??
was it conspiracy??
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #37
171. That so godamned stupid

...because the most important thing to do when you are masterminding an assassination conspiracy is to make sure you are there to be seen and photographed.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:35 AM
Response to Reply #22
69. Ooh, ooh, I know!
George Bush, SR.

That said, it isn't going to happen. We can't even manage to put the current crop of treasonous bastards in jail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:16 AM
Response to Reply #22
116. Bush I comes to mind. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 01:20 AM
Response to Reply #116
282. Many of the conspirators were in Dealey Plaza at the time ---
if you recall that E. Howard Hunt was a novelist -- probably entranced

with Agatha Christie then you recall her 12 on the Orient Express

executing a jury's judgment on a victim?

Would have served Hunt's fancy, I think to structure it that way --


Of course, they did not have hands on -- just conrol over the coup!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:33 AM
Response to Reply #19
67. Probably only one crisis,
but we're close enough to bloody revolution that that might just be one too many. Surely you feel how close the danger is now, right? And while bloody revolution might feel a tad good for all of three seconds, they don't ever go well for anyone.

We need to figure out fairly fast how to avert the coming crises and they are legion. Anyone with half a brain knows the assassination was an inside job and that we've been co-opted for a very, very long time. But, honestly, this country is a lot like a really big barbeque grill and the coals are hot. Stuff like this, now, is like throwing kerosene on it. Let it be denied and let it go. Be the bigger man.

Let's back up and figure out how to stop or at least stave off the implosion and keep it from being an explosion. This, while true, is a major distraction and it doesn't serve any use that I can see. As a matter of fact, I just thought to wonder, why now? Who benefits from this explosion?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ruby the Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:56 AM
Response to Reply #67
80. "Why now"
Why this and why now?

Something stinks like rotten fish here. That failed series was yesterday's news last year before it ever aired.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:13 AM
Response to Reply #13
25. What is this Constitution of which you speak?
So Twentieth Century! We've over it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Nostradammit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:34 AM
Response to Reply #25
38. The hell we are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:22 AM
Response to Reply #38
65. Really? What have "we" been doing defend, protect and reinstate the COTUS?
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 06:24 AM by No Elephants
First Amendment? Fourth Amendment? Sixth Amendment? Eighth Amendement? Fourteenth Amendment?

Supremacy Clause (requiring us to honor treaties and federal laws?)

That's just off the top of my head.

Don't know of anyone other than some not for profits that are even giving any of that a shot. And most of us sure aren't donating to them.

Fighting to preserve the Constitution takes more than posting or talking.

edit for stray letter typo in subject line
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:44 AM
Response to Reply #13
112. That just sounds dusty and out of touch. Why would it do that?
What are you talking about?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #11
186. One problem - I doubt many people think of LBJ as a right winger.
Today we mostly think that war support comes from the rw. Back then it did not. The kids and protesters were the exception. The older people were WWII supporters who still thought that the MIC was protecting America and not their own pocketbook.

I would not put it past LBJ. He was capable of some real evil. And he was extremely ambitious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 01:25 AM
Response to Reply #186
283. Agree, but only because they've had limited info re LBJ ...
I'm waiting for Oliver Stone to do "LBJ" --

he was amazingly violent -- consider MacWallace who was always there to clear

the pathways for him, personally or professionally!

And, he may have had more than just MacWallace -- at least one other young man

wrote about being solicited by LBJ to engage in murder.

Agree with your analysis re VN -- and that still some of that trust is keeping

Americans from understanding the true evil of the rw --

but think we got Kent State because citizens were about to be woken up and were

thinking of joining their kids in the protests -- ?

When they killed the kids at the colleges all parents cared about after that

was getting their kids out of the protests and back home safely.


IMO --
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 04:11 AM
Response to Original message
15. Mrs. Kennedy's private communication to Kruschev mentioned in Douglass book

James W Douglass published an up to date book in 2010 which supports the report. And there's a reason RFK was murdered.

"JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters" is the best book on President Kennedy's assassination to date.

http://www.amazon.com/JFK-Unspeakable-Why-Died-Matters/...


---------------------------------------------------------------
The House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1978 said there was 'probably a conspiracy involved' in JFK's death.

http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/HSCA

The House Select Committee on Assassinations was the second major investigation of the JFK assassination, following the Warren Commission by nearly a decade and a half. The revelations of the Church Committee were profound in the 1970s, and efforts to re-investigate the assassinations of the 1960s picked up steam. The airing of the Zapruder film on television in 1975, showing Kennedy reacting the wrong way to a bullet from the rear, was a defining event which helped push the momentum over the top.

Congress authorized an investigation into the murders of John F. Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Chief Counsel Richard Sprague ran into early troubles, butting heads with the CIA over secrecy oaths among other matters. He was eventually forced to resign, and the investigation was taken over by G. Robert Blakey.

After a few years of work, the House Committee issued a Final Assassinations Report, along with 12 appendix volumes on each of the murders. In the JFK case, the HSCA found that "Kennedy was probably killed as a result of a conspiracy," based in large part on acoustics evidence which captured the sound impulses of gunfire from more than one location in Dealey Plaza. In the MLK case, the HSCAs verdict endorsed a lone-gunman conclusion but "there is a likelihood that James Earl Ray assassinated Dr. Martin Luther King as a result of a conspiracy."

With the declassification of the HSCAs files in the 1990s, researchers know much more about that bodys internal workings. In the areas of the medical evidence and Oswalds trip to Mexico City, two areas the Committee focused heavily on, it is clear that the HSCA did not tell all that it discovered.

Based on new evidence indicating CIA withholding of key information, HSCA Chief Counsel Robert Blakey in 2003 wrote a scathing letter about CIA obstruction of the HSCA inquiry: "I now no longer believe anything the Agency told the committee any further than I can obtain substantial corroboration for it from outside the Agency for its veracity." more


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

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:36 AM
Response to Reply #15
70. I believe, along with hundreds of thousand or millions of people, that
the deaths of JFK, MLK and RFK were not the work of lone gunmen, that there was a conspiracy in each of those cases. And a cover up.

However, the exact details and participants and reasons are where we all seem to get a little fuzzy. I'm not even sure that Oswald and Ray were the shooters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Enthusiast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:55 AM
Response to Reply #70
79. I'm with you. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Raster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:28 AM
Response to Reply #70
105. Oswald was NOT a shooter, pure patsy. Ray, THOUGHT he was a shooter, but he was not the only one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Myrina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:35 AM
Response to Reply #105
128. Check out these images:
Color enhanced photo from the Grassy Knoll (dangit I can't remember who's book this was in!)





and another photo taken less than 30 minutes after the shooting - in the railroad yards behind the knoll, of "Bums" being arrested by "Dallas Policemen". Interesting that "Policeman #1" is carrying A RIFLE Don't cops usually just carry handguns? There's no record of said "Bums" being booked into custody or questioned, and a couple have said they bear striking resemblance to CIA hitmen Charles Harrelson and E. Howard Hunt ...






No Oswald in sight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
midnight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #128
158. Look at this link: There is a photo of bush's hairline that
appears to match the man firing the weapon in your first photo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #158
233. What link?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #105
231. I saw a video of MLK, Jr's son visitng Ray in prison. Ray said, "I did not kill your father."
King replied, "I believe you."
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 01:32 AM
Response to Reply #105
285. No -- Ray wasn't the shooter either --
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
valerief Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #70
129. Yeah, lone gunmen are to coups as voter fraud is to election fraud.
Which scenarios seem more likely to you in each case? The louder the MSM shouts, "Lone gunmen," and "Voter fraud," the clearer I hear, "Coup," and "Election fraud."
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #70
146. there were more involved and not a lone gunman could have
done so much damage. remember the grassy knoll story??? gunshots heard in different locations for JFK assassination.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
liberalmike27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #70
166. I'm Not Sure Who Couldn't
Think it was at least somewhat of an organized "Agency" of people, or a small, very small subset of folks who did it. Some try to discount it by saying "Oh Sure, hundreds of agents at the CIA can keep a secret like that." But that's idiot thinking, as the CIA never tells other agents, and besides, my guess is they used their resources, but those arranging the event had some kind of personal connection to Johnson. Check out Blood, Money, and Power by McClellan and see what you think.

Clearly though, when almost everyone you ever hear about being killed, and add a lot of odd Wellstone "accidents" to the roux, and it is very understandable that people would come to the suspicion that it was a sort of "whack-a-mole" technique, hoping that if they killed enough people trying to improve things for everyone, to shut down wars, to do good, that others might start keeping their heads down. And in truth, I think they succeeded.

As far as the Kennedy assassinations, both were clearly a threat to the Johnson presidency. He'll be a suspect in my book forever. It's like Cheney and Bush and 9/11. I'll never be able to place them at the scene, but I'll always think they at least had knowledge that might've stopped the event, hell we've even heard some of it, in the CIA memo on August 6th. Went from 20 percent to 90 percent approval, and it sure took the attention off of Jeb and Kathy's stealing the election, the recounts and such.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #70
193. Yes, and I think our only hope is that someone in on the conspiracy
will want to take the credit and write about it - for release after their death. Otherwise we probably never know. Which makes me very sad. These murders were the point we lost our innocence and it would be closure for those of us who lived through it.

Surely there must be some right winger out there who is still sure they did the right thing and is not afraid to come ahead and say it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 01:31 AM
Response to Reply #70
284. Actually, many say that the evening of the assassination, that many in DC
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 01:31 AM by defendandprotect
had the names of the conspirators on their lips and were discussing what

had gone down!

The private investigators also did fantastic work bringing together info from

all over the country, etal --

Certainly agree Oswald didn't kill anyone --

And John Tunnheim -- who charied the 1992 JFK Classified Records Act Panel

informs us that the panel unanimously agreed that ....

'OSWALD WAS EMPLOYED BY THE CIA WORKING ON HIGH LEVEL ASSIGNMENTS AND PROBABLY

ALSO FOR THE FBI."

Journalists had immediately asked to see Oswald's IRS and W-2 forms -- which were

denied. But obviously the Tunnheim Panel would have seen them.


And also agree that James Earl Ray didn't shoot MLK -- just another patsy --

Ray wrote a book which was excellent -- and his brother just did a fairly recent

one -- last ten years? - which is also quite revealing about things that Americans

know little of!!



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SusanaMontana41 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:01 AM
Response to Original message
20. William Holden? He was gorgeous! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:18 AM
Response to Reply #20
28. And he co-starred in Sunset Boulevard with Gloria Swanson, one of Joe Kennedy's many mistresses.
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 05:30 AM by No Elephants
But, I don't know if Jackie cheated with him. Wouldn't blame her if she had, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
sofa king Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:22 AM
Response to Reply #28
64. I didn't know that!
I do know that Holden was a last-choice for Billy Wilder in Sunset Boulevard, largely because Holden's drinking had apparently already led him to similar bad choices and lost friends. He was considered "washed up" by the late '40s, and it was that very status that eventually led Wilder to choose him for the role of a washed up writer. Sunset Boulevard shot Holden back into the limelight as if from a cannon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:45 AM
Response to Reply #64
75. What part did you not know, then? The part about Swanson and Joe K?
I did not know that about the casting.

I've watched Sunset on TV a couple of times. Holden's acting was impeccable. Ditto in Stalag 17.

What kind of person he was IRL, though, I have no clue. If he and Jackie had a thing, I hope he did not hurt her. She got enough of that in her marriage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
trud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:20 AM
Response to Reply #75
120. Holden
Big on environmental causes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
valerief Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #75
132. I remember reading Shelley Winters's autobiography years ago.
She said she hooked up with Holden every New Year's Eve.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
trud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 04:39 PM
Response to Reply #132
249. Shelley and Burt Lancaster too n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
trud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:33 AM
Response to Reply #20
68. William Holden? Lucky woman. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Peregrine Took Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:24 AM
Response to Reply #20
154. Absolutely! And seemed like a nice person, too. Later in life began a wildlife
sanctuary in Africa.

Too bad he had such a sad death (tripped on a throw rug and hit his head.)

Found days later as I recall.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Peregrine Took Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #154
157. Interesting phone conversations between LBJ and Jackie - friendly - and he
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Adenoid_Hynkel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #154
250. great actor- pity he was total Republican
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 04:45 PM by Adenoid_Hynkel
and buddy of Reagan

still love his performance in Stalag 17, though
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
FlaGranny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:11 AM
Response to Original message
24. My first thought after
the assassination was that Johnson was involved. I remember their intense dislike for each other before the convention. I was completely blown away by JFK's choice of Johnson to be VP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Festivito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:21 AM
Response to Reply #24
30. Who instigated it? Johnson or "Texas businessmen" or was Johnson allowed to think he did it.
Interesting that even she would not elaborate on who those Texas businessmen were fifty years after her death.

Makes me wonder, how many of our CIA, SS, NSA, et. al. are really Texas businessmen.

And, I wonder less at "what is wrong with Obama."
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:27 AM
Response to Reply #30
33. Jackie's believing something does not make it so.
I have no idea whether or not Johnson or Texas businessmen were involved true, but this story changes nothing.

And Obama was Obama long before he ran for President.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Auggie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:37 AM
Response to Reply #33
39. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Nostradammit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:41 AM
Response to Reply #33
42. This story changes some people's minds about what happened
on that horrible day when a cabal of rich Texas criminals conspired to kill
the president of the United States of America.

Some who were loathe to entertain such an awful idea will now be that much
closer to putting the puzzle pieces together. Jackie has given them permission
to think the unthinkable.

History has a way of revealing the truth of matters and we are now nearly 50
years along. The truth is coming.

Hope you are on the good side of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:50 AM
Response to Reply #42
47. People have already had decades to put pieces together.
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 05:52 AM by No Elephants
Some people who already had certain beliefs will see this as confirmation of the beliefs they already held. It isn't.


I wish we knew what happened. We don't. And Jackie's belief does not change that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
IthinkThereforeIAM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:02 AM
Response to Reply #42
92. Why no mention of the Dulles brothers...
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 08:34 AM by IthinkThereforeIAM
... who were in it funding Hitler via Union Bank, Harriman brothers, Herb Walker, Prescott Bush, Sr. partners at the mentioned concerns? JFK had fired one of the Dulles brothers, and then "boom" (or is that boom boom boom?).

Member of the Grassy Knoll Society since 2002


on edit: To proudly mention my membership
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #92
291. They are very much in the picture ....
but the coup could not have been pulled off or covered up without

having LBJ in the presidency --

LBJ was an essential and primary player in the coup -- connected to many

facets of it -- from his longtime friendship with Hoover, to his connections

to oil industry/Murchinson/Mafia -- his familiarity with having his own path

cleared for him by hired killers --- and his personal hatred for JFK.

And his conenctions to Brown & Root -- MIC.


Dulles was fired by JFK -- so was Richard Bissell of CIA -- and his brother was

Charles Bissel who was Mayor of Dallas -- I may be reversing their names.


JFK also fired the psychopath Gen. Edwin Walker -- who was spreading rightwing

propaganda in the military. This is the guy that Oswald allegedly fired on in his

home one night -- missing him but leaving a bullet in the wall!!

This is also the guy who led the racist riot at Ole Miss to keep James Meredith from

registering/entering the university!!

He was captured there -- and Judge recommended psychiatric treatment for him.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #42
172. Why should this change anyone's mind?

Does this change your mind about Ted Kennedy believing it was Oswald?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #172
236. If I were a theorist, I'd reply, "Maybe he wanted to stay alive."
But, since I'm not, I won't.

;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #236
237. Umm.... that would make sense if he didn't write his memoir while terminally ill

...and scheduled publication after his death.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #237
240. Now you are beginning to understand why I am not a theorist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 12:43 AM
Response to Reply #237
292. Maybe he wanted to make sure that his kids and grandchildren stayed alive ...!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Tunkamerica Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:41 AM
Response to Reply #33
43. -1
just to make it even
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Festivito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:42 AM
Response to Reply #33
44. Changes nothing into something. Why was she afraid enough for 50 years of waiting.
Makes it so. Don't be silly. Of course it does not "make it so." Making her so, so, will require even more investigation -- long overdue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
trud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:22 AM
Response to Reply #33
122. A Texan friend of mine says it was a common belief
in Texas early in Johnson's "career" before he became VP that he had had a political opponent murdered.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 12:47 AM
Response to Reply #122
293. True -- interesting story on that which Robt. Caro tells in one of his first volumes on LBJ....
but then at Caro chickens out later in his writings --

Lots of other info on this murder -- probably could be found on internet--

Quite a shocking story -- and quite believable!!

In fact, it seems that LBJ had a number of killers on hand to keep the pathway

clear for him --

Mac Wallace seems to have acted not only politically for LBJ but in personal affairs!!

One involved LBJ's sister -- the other involved Madeline Brown's maid -- !!

Stories are out there -- and little doubt about them!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 12:35 AM
Response to Reply #33
290. Nonsense ... Jackie was there ... she saw the wounds which were ignored by Warren Commission...
and she was quite familiar with LBJ and his criminal nature -- !!

This story resurrects what the Warren Commission sought to bury!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ruby the Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:38 AM
Response to Reply #30
40. This is confusing to me.
"50 years after her death"

That would be the year 2044, and the tapes were apparently recorded a few months after the Nov 1963 assassination.

?

Even more intriguing is "And, I wonder less at "what is wrong with Obama."" - are you seeing a timing connection between this and the NYT OpEd released Saturday Night?

I have my :tinfoilhat: fully secured and edges crimped in place. Lay out a good old CT on us! Would be an welcome and awesome sauce distraction from the shit going on in the markets right now. :thumbsup:

(NOT sarcastic. Genuinely curious. Bring!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Festivito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:52 AM
Response to Reply #40
49. I'm confused about what it is confuses you here.
She asked it to be released 50 years after her death. Clear enough.

Is the release timed? I'd say so what. Even if there was evidence, trial and thusly proof, it would just a tidbit of trivia that the release of these articles coincided during another crisis that would overshadow it.

Keep that hat on, if it makes you feel good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:58 AM
Response to Reply #49
54. "She asked it to be released 50 years after her death. Clear enough"
Clear enough proof of what? You assumed in another post that she stipulated that out of fear. There's no proof of that, either.

If it was fear, are you implying she would have left any child, grandchild or other descendant of hers vulnerable?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #54
127. Remember, she made that stipulation only months after JFK was killed,
and one reason she took up with Onasis was because he was rich & powerful enough to protect her. I guess she assumed that the assassins assumed she knew too much and would be targeted. Were that the case, and she had an 'accident' in '65, the tapes would be released in 2015, which is not outrageous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #127
226. Until now, I've read that her children were her concern. "If they're killing Kennedys...."
However, let's assume she did take up with Onassis for her protection. What does that have to do with my post?

MY post made a few points.

One is that Festivito thought her denying release for 50 years proved something specific. I don't think it necessarily proves what he said at all.

Another point was that, assuming fear was her motive, release in 50 years from her death would still leave her children and grandchildren and great grandchildren open to retaliation. That is the last thing she would have done, IMO.

I see no evidence from her life that she was concerned about her own safety, but not about the safety of her descendants. If her motivation was fear, she would, in my opinion, have taken the secret to her grave, not given an interview within weeks of JFK's assassination.

Of anyone, she had reason to know that the only way you really keep something secret is never to tell another soul.

I don't know why she specified 50 years from her death, if indeed she did. But I do know the difference between speculation and assumptions, on the one hand, and proof on the other hand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #226
253. I should think she'd only be worried about the coup plotters themselves,
and it's safe to assume that 50+ years after the death of a 30+ year old woman would be plenty of time for the plotters to die off. This would keep her and her progeny safe.

I doubt that she thought there was a generational threat on the coup plotters' side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 12:54 AM
Response to Reply #253
294. Not exactly ... LBJ would have certainly been concerned for his family and children ...
for his grandchldren -- and keeping his connections to the coup hidden --

They went to great lengths to knock out the closing segments of TMWKK --

"The Guilty" -- think YouTube has those final segments up --


Poppy Bush is still alive -- do you think he doesn't care about his family and

brining maybe even Jeb to power?


A good read is Richard Sprague on this -- The Taking of America 1-2-3

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/ToA/ToA.html

Read the section on threats to the Kennedy's --


It looks like many more are also ready to believe that Ted Kennedy was framed

at Chappaquiddick -- and it was likely the work of E. Howard Hunt and crew !!


and also I certainly think they killed John Kennedy, Jr. --

one of the oddest incidents ever!!



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ruby the Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:10 AM
Response to Reply #49
59. Good? It feels kinda crunchy, but
I was serious. What are you thinking - is this to deflect from what is going on economically?

It seriously makes no sense to me that Caroline would expose her family to this type of gossip (LBJ, Jackie's affairs) based on a cancelled, 0-ratings, straight to cable, katie holmes starring yawn-fest about rumors about the Kennedys that may or may not have taken place some 40-50 years ago (adding, that no one paid attention to when it DID air).
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:27 AM
Response to Reply #59
124. So Ruby, do you know what edits were made per the deal?
If not, what is your whole routine about? She made a deal to bury, alter, and downplay a vicious attack movie. You say 'no one paid attention when it aired' but that is what we are talking about, the process that lead it to fail. It was removed from major network and placed on a cable outlet that can only draw a fraction of the audience of network. You say 'cancelled' but it was not that sort of series, it was produced whole, nothing to cancel or pick up.
The deal they made is why you are here saying 'it failed'. The deal made it vanish. That is the whole point. So saying 'it vanished' means nothing. Caroline sought to make it vanish, and she did so. To do that, she threw ABC a bone. This might shock you, but some Moms keep bones to pass to their kids to be thrown to the mob when needed. Anything Caroline has at her disposal was left to her by her Mother to use as she sees fit for the living.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 12:58 AM
Response to Reply #124
295. +1 ---
and presume that this was the film that concerned her --

and nothing else they might have had?


Also wondering if with the death of Arthur Schlesinger that the existence of the tapes

may have become known? And perhaps it was to her advantage to get them out rather than

to suffer some attempt by those still involved in an active cover up to try to recover

them?


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:56 AM
Response to Reply #30
53. Good questions
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 06:07 AM by Mimosa
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 01:04 AM
Response to Reply #53
296. Quite a picture -- thanks for the reminder ....
and it has always seemed like it was echoing the Agatha Christie novel

where she has the 12 murderers act together -- appear on the scene --

That, I'm sure, would have appealed to E. Howard Hunt, himself a novelist.


Any number of them were there -- don't know if we've discovered them all?


Certainly, the Bush family will be looking to replay 2000 at some point with Jeb?



:evilgrin:



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
newspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:16 AM
Response to Reply #30
117. In the Nixon tapes
didn't he mention something about the guys from Texas? After the JFK assassination, I think Nixon was also paranoid. Didn't one of the oil men from Texas on his deathbed say he was approached to join the cabal against Kennedy and refused?

The contents of the investigation is supposed to be sealed for fifty years. Times about up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 01:05 AM
Response to Reply #117
297. I imagine the next attempt ....
will be to put JEB in the White House to keep the cover up going -- !!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 01:37 AM
Response to Reply #30
286. LBJ was close to H L Hunt and Oil industry/Murchinson -- and therfore Mafia ....
LBJ was about to be thrown in jail --

Also LBJ was close to Hoover --

MIC would have gotten it's war and LBJ was close to Brown & Root -

All common inerests -- allied

Oil is a national security issue -- no oil/no war --


This couldn't have been done without the protection of having LBJ in presidency --

and of course Mafia was a part of it --

Though extremeist/violent Cuban exiles had a lot to do with the murders which kept

the coverup going --

Among others -- I presume!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:23 AM
Response to Reply #24
31. A powerful, popular Texan, chosen as V.P. by a Northeastern millionaire?
Neutralized LBJ, too (unless you accept that LBJ got his revenge by killing JFK).

Makes sense to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Scottybeamer70 Donating Member (844 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:29 AM
Response to Original message
35. I'm sure Jackie O was not alone
about those thoughts of Johnson.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
roxiejules Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #35
150. There are claims that LBJ's mistress agreed
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
liberalmike27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #150
177. Had Not Heard That
Whether it's true or not I don't know. But like I've said, after a lot of legitimate, non assassination reading about Johnson, his life, and his personality, clearly it is possible, he has it within his DNA to do so.

It isn't unusual for someone to pick a runner-up in the presidential primary to run as VP, especially if he's from a different region, and might help pick up states the presidential candidate might not be able to.

It seems Bush Sr., and Jr., followed the convention of choosing VPs that the country would never want to take their place. Quayle was a bit of a dummy, and Cheney is an ogre, much more conservative than Bush even.

Clearly Bush-daddy was in oil, and known to be working for the CIA also, so it would not surprise me if he was around. Oswald of course claimed he was a patsy, realizing how quickly he'd been fingered, when there was no real connection or way for them to find him so fast, as if he'd been followed from the minute he left the Book Depository.

There are just too many things pointing to Johnson, and the CIA, at least a few of them. Of course Bush's Yale secret society is filled with CIA agents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
roxiejules Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #177
198. Don't forget about Zapata Corp.
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 12:05 PM by roxiejules
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zapata_Corporation

The company traces its origins to Zapata Oil, founded in 1953 by future-U.S. President George H. W. Bush, along with his business partners John Overbey, Hugh Liedtke, Bill Liedtke, and Thomas J. Devine. Bush and Thomas J. Devine were oil-wildcatting associates. Their joint activities culminated in the establishment of Zapata Oil. The initial $1 million investment for Zapata was provided by the Liedtke brothers and their circle of investors, by Bush's father and maternal grandfatherPrescott Bush and George Herbert Walker, and his family circle of friends. Hugh Liedtke was named president, Bush was vice president; Overbey soon left.

According to a CIA internal memo dated November 29, 1975, Zapata Petroleum began in 1953 through Bush's joint efforts with Thomas J. Devine, a CIA staffer who had resigned his agency position that same year to go into private business, but who continued to work for the CIA under commercial cover. Devine would later accompany Bush to Vietnam in late 1967 as a "cleared and witting commercial asset" of the agency, acted as his informal foreign affairs advisor, and had a close relationship with him through 1975.

snip

In early November 1960, the CIA agreed to use US contractors for the maritime component of the operation. The CIA codename for the Bay of Pigs Invasion of April 1961 was "Operation Zapata". Through his work with Zapata Off-Shore, Bush is alleged to have come into contact with Felix Rodriguez, Barry Seal, Porter Goss, and E. Howard Hunt, around the time of the Bay of Pigs operation.




Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 01:11 AM
Response to Reply #150
298. Madelaine Brown has really filled in a lot of the blanks ... especially
about the meeting the night before the assassination at Clint Murchinson's house --

where a large number of males came late to the home to attend the meeting --

There's a long list of them -- including LBJ and Hoover -- can't recall them all

at the moment -- but on the videos -- a great number of them on YouTube, Madelaine

Brown recites the names --


There had been a social/dinner, whatever earlier in the evening at the Murchinson house.

It was attended by Madelaine Brown, among others. Later in the evening men started

arriving for this meeting.

Another interesting guest at dinner was journalist, Helen Thomas -- and the morning after

the assassination, she filed an AFFIDAVIT covering the events of the evening and the names

of those who had arrived for the meeting.


This is also where after the meeting, LBJ tells Madelaine Brown that "JFK will never

embarrass him again -- that's not a threat, that's a promise!"


And think about this -- Madelaine Brown would never have told us any of this except that

those protecting LBJ had her son killed when he tried to claim part of LBJ's fortune as

his son!



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
TwentyFive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:49 AM
Response to Original message
46. My first thought always that Johnson was behind it. Johnson=sociopath
Johnson's handling of the Vietnam War always struck me as odd. How can anybody direct that much killing of innocents, soldiers? Vietnam desensitized our nation...in a way that only a right winger could love.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:01 AM
Response to Reply #46
56. So true. Vietnam tore this nation apart.
Vietnam changed everything. It was more traumatic than JFK's assassination.

I do not believe LBJ was any more sociopathic than any other 'great man'. He reminded me of a power hungry Roman consul type. There was at least 25% good to him. But he and all his Texas buddies were money hungry. Vietnam was a profitable war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #56
151. but then again aren't all wars that are started profitable???
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
liberalmike27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #56
181. Of Course, We Were Already in Vietnam Before 1963
Entering during the Eisenhower administration.

I've read before that Kennedy had already decided to withdraw about 2000 soldiers from Vietnam around Christmas that year too. The CIA and MIC are tightly related, I think. Bush and Republicans are tightly connected to the MIC, and the Bush family, well let's just say there aren't many families that are so connected to the Military, going all the way back to Bush Jr. Great grandfather, who was in the War Department, acquisitions way back then, up through the Carlyle Group, who bought and sold DOD companies up to the present, as well as (surprise) media outlets. War and media are like soup and sandwich.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Myrina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #46
123. Johnson was a stooge for the MIC ...
... you could tell he was sweatin' bullets (no pun) in Dallas that night he took the oath, and then to give the "I shall not seek and will not accept" speech in '68 ... he knew who owned him and what they'd do to him if, as resident of 1600, he'd try to end the Viet Nam incursion.

Let's not forget that Nixon was Eisenhower's VP - and supposed 'shoo in' for Prez in 1960 - and when Johnson bowed out, and then RFK was killed, we got Nixon for Prez and back on track to full-on-war in Viet Nam even past any point of logic (but not MIC profit).

As Donald Sutherland's character in JFK said "Follow the Money".
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:55 AM
Response to Original message
52. Wasn't there something about JFK thought he could be assassinated on that trip as well?
I remember reading somewhere that he had thoughts that something could happen on that very trip.

Then there was the Secret Service who were called off from standing on the back of the car at the airport.

And with this new revelation, lending substance to a conspiracy theory.

Don't forget the pristine bullet which hit 3 people and a car seat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:03 AM
Response to Reply #52
58. Yes. Read JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters
God bless you and your family, Caroline. :D The truth will protect all of you, I'm sure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
boomerbust Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:11 AM
Response to Original message
60. My conclusion
Right Wing Hit Job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ichingcarpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:17 AM
Response to Reply #60
62. The Men Who Killed Kennedy- BBC series- - The guilty men
The Men Who Killed Kennedy is a video documentary series by Nigel Turner that originally aired in 1988 in England with two one-hour segments about the John F. Kennedy assassination. The United States corporation, Arts & Entertainment Company, purchased the rights to the original two segments. Three one-hour segments were added in 1991. A sixth segment was added in 1995.

Finally, three additional hourly segments were added by the History Channel in November 2003. The ninth segment, titled "The Guilty Men", directly implicated Lyndon B. Johnson. Within days, Johnson's widow, Lady Bird Johnson, more of his surviving associates, ex-President Jimmy Carter, and the lone, living Warren Commission commissioner and ex-President Gerald R. Ford immediately complained to the History Channel. They subsequently threatened legal action against Arts & Entertainment Company, owner of the History Channel. "The Guilty Men" segment was completely withdrawn by the History Channel.

Also during the series, French prisoner Christian David named Lucien Sarti as one of three French criminals hired to carry out the assassination of Kennedy, when he was interviewed by author Anthony Summers. This claim is one of the most strongly investigated theories presented on the show.


Watch it here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgNfQYpS1gQ
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
goforit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #60
149. Yep, GHWB was just their tool.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
begin_within Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:14 AM
Response to Original message
61. This was released now to distract everyone from ________
What?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ichingcarpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:19 AM
Response to Reply #61
63. That there is a real right wing conspiracy that wants to change govt?
Through illegal and nefarious means?

Yeah Caroline wouldn't want that to come out.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Adenoid_Hynkel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:43 AM
Response to Reply #63
110. a rightwing conspiracy to get a president who created Medicare and passed civil rights?
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 08:44 AM by Adenoid_Hynkel
sorry. that doesn't make sense.

LBJ may have been a massive douche as a person, and he was horrible regarding Vietnam, but there is zero proof that he had anything to do with JFK's murder. The "evidence" cited is as asinine as the stuff the birthers and moon landing hoaxers push.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:50 AM
Response to Reply #110
135. Layers beneath layers -
a lot of people ASSUMED LBJ has something to do with it - suppose the guilty parties planned it that way: the assassination was on LBJs home turf, he personally benefited from it, and as the man at the top of the totem pole it would be easy to make it look like the buck stopped there. Thus, they were able to prevent real investigation with the threat of implicating him. He was allowed to effect the changes in civil rights, establish Medicare, etc., as a trade off of the Warren Commission's whitewash and not interfering with the MIC. Had he not played along, the thing would have been pinned on him years ago.

It is easy to postulate that they had him over a barrel, and he acceded to blackmail despite having nothing to do with the plot - only the coverup.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 01:23 AM
Response to Reply #110
301. Great deal of evidence connecting LBJ to the coup -- from beginning to end -- !!
Edited on Thu Aug-11-11 01:24 AM by defendandprotect
Also LBJ had engaged in political violence and personal violence much of his life --

By the end, he was begging to confess to his crimes --

Pierre Salinger tells us that he and Bill Moyers considered LBj to be "clinically

psychopathic" --

Finally it was decided to seek a psychiatrist who would listen to LBJ's confessions

and keep the secrets -- think it was done for $1 million.


JFK had awakened the nation to the fact that we still had Segregation, Inc. in the

South sitting on the shoulders of Uncle Sam. Country was ready for this change.


Medicare -- presumably the Congress was proposing it -- don't really recall the situation

at the time except that many elderly were losing their homes, etal because of huge

expenses with cancer? And at that point, the Dem Party was not what it is now.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 01:15 AM
Response to Reply #63
299. +1 --
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:52 AM
Response to Reply #61
77. Whole list of things people must wish we were distracted from now.
Downgrade, Democrats pushing cuts to social programs like fuel subsidies, Social Security and Medicare while fighting and funding one war after another, how the DLC trojan horse has taken over our Party and our country. And that's without thinking much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
harmonicon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #61
205. Gosh... what would a Murdoch tabloid want to distract people from? nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 01:18 AM
Response to Reply #205
300. Coup on JFK and our people's government is always with us ...
Edited on Thu Aug-11-11 01:18 AM by defendandprotect
Thought that Jim Garrison's comment about us all being "Hamlet's"

wondering who killed the King was very appropo --

and the event was "prologue" --



Love Jim Garrison and highly recommend his books to anyone who wants to

understand more about all of this!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:38 AM
Response to Original message
72. LBJ could be a prick, but I can't imagine him doing that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:40 AM
Response to Reply #72
73. I think he was informed fairly soon after the event
But hey, he was a bastard along with being a politician, so who knows?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ichingcarpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:43 AM
Response to Reply #72
74. The Wink and smile
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 06:58 AM
Response to Reply #74
81. Wow. Don't think I've ever seen that photo before. Who is/was he?
And why is Lady Bird also smiling?

Surely, no one was cracking jokes around Mrs. Kennedy at that point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Adenoid_Hynkel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:05 AM
Response to Reply #74
93. that wink could mean anything
citing it as some sort of proof that LBJ offed JFK is as absurd as it is paranoid.
occasionally people make jokes or smile even in tragedy. I've heard many a laugh at funerals over the years.
this claim kind of reminds me of how the rightwing tried to isolate a photo of Bill Clinton laughing at the Wellstone memorial, to say it showed his contempt for the dead and supposed plans to exploit the tragedy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:12 AM
Response to Reply #93
96. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Adenoid_Hynkel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:19 AM
Response to Reply #96
99. yeah, I figured they knew each other
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 08:28 AM by Adenoid_Hynkel
no shit. they served together as Texas congressman.
but that hardly proves the wink is secret code for "Hey, way to kill Jack, Lyndon!"
and i somehow doubt they would make their supposedly secret signal directly into a reporter's camera, with Jack's widow in the frame. Just a hunch.
again, this is all tinfoil hat nonsense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #74
159. who is that guy LBJ is looking at?
and Lady B I don't think she is "smiling", that was a terrible time in our history that is when everything went downhill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iamthebandfanman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:35 AM
Response to Reply #72
106. he was put on the ticket
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 08:36 AM by iamthebandfanman
as a token conservative , correct?
to even out the ticket?

ive watched a few documentaries about LBJ during the first 24 hours after JFKs death, and i have to say all of them kinda painted a nasty uncaring un-compassionate guy. literally his biggest concern seemed to be consolidating power behind himself.

i know people around here give him credit for keeping JFKs policies alive , but hey.. maybe that was a little bit of guilt?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
happyslug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #106
245. No, to appease the big city bosses who distrusted Kennedy
The big city bosses AND southern Democrats did NOT trust JFK, thus once JFK had the votes to be nominated as the Presidential Candidate, to appease these two groups, groups needed to win in the Main election, Johnson was picked as the VP.

Remember, this is pre-1972 convention, where most of the delegates were picked by state organizations NOT in primaries. The Classic case is the 1968 Democratic Convention, which pick Humphrey, a person who had won NO primaries.

Do to the fact that the selection of the Candidates had to be done at the Convention. deals were made all the time as to who would be President or Vice President. In 1960 Kennedy won the Nomination but had to accept Johnson as his VP, just like FDR, having won the 1944 Nomination, had to accept Truman as his VP, replacing Henry Wallace who had been the VP since 1941, when he took the oath as VP with FDR after FDR had won his third term but FDR's original VP refused to be the VP for the third time.

Things change in 1972, primaries are the way to win Convention nominations today. The main affect has to make the US election system top down as oppose to what it was prior to 1972, bottom up. i.e. People on top tell people on the bottom what to do, prior to the widespread adoption of primaries, it was people at the bottom of the political parties that told the people on top what to do. Yes, individuals have more "Say" in a primary system, but so does money to run the ads to get the people to vote for one candidate or another. Prior to 1960, the local election "bosses" told the top people what was needed to get the candidate elected. A fundamental Change in how power is shared in America, and all the result of the switch to primaries instead of Conventions to pick candidates.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #72
178. If George W. Bush could start a war and kill, injure and displace hundreds of
thousands of Iraqis and Americans, LBJ could certainly agree to go along with just about anything.

Remember, LBJ is not accused of pulling a trigger. He is accused of being a power broker and the figurehead for a group of unscrupulous criminals -- of going along and arranging and then covering up.

I's perfectly possible. He never would have had to get his hands dirty. He may have been terrified of the people around him who actually pulled the trigger.

Peer pressure is a tremendous motivator.

That's what makes gangs function: peer pressure. And it is quite possible that this poor kid from Texas was subjected to a lot of social and peer pressure that could have caused him to get involved in some things that were really horrible.

He could have been the mastermind, but it did not sound that way to me. What was chilling to me in the movie was the way the woman who worked for the Murkisons (Murchisons?) described what went on in their household around the time of Kennedy's assassination. She struck me as being totally credible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 01:25 AM
Response to Reply #72
302. Then you should do some reading ---
Edited on Thu Aug-11-11 01:29 AM by defendandprotect
Lots of info re LBJ on internet and YouTube --

Try his mistress' videos -- Madelaine Brown -- YouTube --

Try Robert Caro -- though he chickens out in his last volumes on LBJ --


However, LBJ had connections to all areas of the coup --

LBJ was involved with Oil/Mafia/Clint Murchison - H. L. Hunt

Brown & Root which puts him into the MIC -- VN was their reward

LBJ was very close to Hoover/FBI understanding his power via blackmail --

Dulles -- Allen Dulles who was fired by JFK from CIA after Bay of Pigs is a long

time rw conspirator and involved in TREASON -- See Project Paperclip

was also visiting LBJ the afternoon before the coup at LBJ's DC home --

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
colsohlibgal Donating Member (670 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 07:09 AM
Response to Original message
82. I Don't Believe Most of What She says
I don't believe Johnson was involved but can't rule that out. I think there is a good chance Oswald never shot anyone and was just their patsy.

I agree with what Thom Hartmann and Lamar Waldron came up with after an over ten year investigation, going through tons of materials including de classified files. It would seem that Dallas was try # 3 follwing tries in Chicago a few weeks before and Miami the week before. Not surprisingly it was all greased in Dallas. It was carried out by the the mob and the CIA as an offshoot of a program to whack Castro.

Whether it had anything to do with the hit or not, there were a ton of big name republican in Dallas at the same time, Nixon, Hoover, Howard Hunt, and Poppy Bush from back in his spook days.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 01:39 AM
Response to Reply #82
303. Hartmann is often right but he is not infallible ....
Why would you disbelieve Mrs. Kennedy?

I'd be interested in your reasons --


And why would you fail to believe that Johnson -- who took envelopes of cash payoff's

even when he was in the White House -- would not be involved in something like this?


Had JFK not been assassinated, LBJ was destined for jail -- just for one motive!

Additionally, there is no way that the plot could have been carried out without having

LBJ in the Oval Office -- it would have been impossible to protect the plotters and to

keep the cover up going without LBJ. Think about it!


I can agree that Dallas TEXAS was probably not the preferred killing ground because so

many of the plotters were connected to TEXAS -- especially Johnson and Connolly!!

H. L. Hunt -- Jack Ruby -- Charles Bissell and Richard Bissel -- CIA and Mayor of Dallas!

Fired by JFK from CIA!


You're right about Oswald -- Tunnheim Panel reported back their unanimous agreement after

reviewing the files under the 1992 JFK Classified Records Act which Tunnheim headed that ...

"OSWALD WAS EMPLOYED BY THE CIA WORKING ON HIGH LEVEL ASSIGNMENTS AND PROBABLY

ALSO BY THE FBI" -

VN was the reward the MIC received --


True -- the presence of so many of the plotters in Dealey Plaza that day looks like an

Agatha Christie novel - Murder on the Orient Express comes to mind --

That would have appealed to Plumber/novelist E. Howard Hunt --


Don't forget Jack Ruby and his connections to Nixon -- especially at time of HUAC !!


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
sparky58 Donating Member (7 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 07:15 AM
Response to Original message
83. Jackie O
It was true that LBJ got into Congress thru the mysterious voting boxes in Duvall County, and Dallas was full of white right, KKK affiliated right wing haters, but I don't think he was part of a conspiracy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bigwillq Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 07:28 AM
Response to Reply #83
86. Hello.
Welcome to DU! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SharonAnn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #83
152. I thought that was his Senate run. He was already in Congress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Chorophyll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 07:22 AM
Response to Original message
84. The Sun is about as reputable a UK newspaper as The News of the World
and the Daily Mail. In fact, it's one of Murdoch's. Just pointing out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
mulsh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 07:27 AM
Response to Original message
85. no links to the tapes? really? a couple of stories in sleazy British
tabloids? come on conspiracy theorists can do way better than this. This is a meme wingers were spouting a couple of years ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
seafan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 07:44 AM
Response to Original message
88. '.....a cabal of Texas tycoons were involved.'
Also reported in he UK Express last night:



Jackie Kennedy's audio tapes are set to be made public in an upcoming ABC television special. They were made months after the assassination of JFK.


August 7,2011


.....

On the assassination, a second source said Jackie believed gunman Lee Harvey Oswald was part of a much larger conspiracy. She became convinced that Vice-President Lyndon Johnson, JFKs successor, and a cabal of Texas tycoons were involved.

Those businessmen expected that LBJ would give them more favourable treatment in Vietnam War contracts and oil policies.

There is no doubt that Jackie wanted the truth to come out, but feared that she and her children, Caroline and John Jr, might also be marked for death by the conspirators.




From NPR, December 24, 2003:


Current criticism over Halliburton's lucrative Iraq contracts has some historians drawing parallels to a similar controversy involving the company during Lyndon B. Johnson's administration.

Nearly 40 years ago, Halliburton faced almost identical charges over its work for the U.S. government in Vietnam allegations of overcharging, sweetheart contracts from the White House and war profiteering. Back then, the company's close ties to President Johnson became a liability. Today as NPR's John Burnett reports in the last of a three-part series Halliburton seems to be distancing itself from its former chief executive officer, Vice President Dick Cheney.

The story of Halliburton's ties to the White House dates back to the 1940s, when a Texas firm called Brown & Root constructed a massive dam project near Austin. The company's founders, Herman and George Brown, won the contract to build Mansfield Dam thanks to the efforts of Johnson, who was then a Texas congressman.

After Johnson took over the Oval Office, Brown & Root won contracts for huge construction projects for the federal government. By the mid-1960s, newspaper columnists and the Republican minority in Congress began to suggest that the company's good luck was tied to its sizable contributions to Johnson's political campaign.

.....






The words of Jackie Kennedy from 1964 should be quite illuminating.










Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 07:50 AM
Response to Reply #88
89. Mrs. Kennedy wouldn't have known any details
But despite the family's trauma, she and Bobby knew whom to suspect. I've found it odd that many people did not realise she married Onassis because he had the means and ability to protect her children.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
IthinkThereforeIAM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:17 AM
Response to Reply #89
98. Yes...

... that is exactly why, and why so much coverage of what Ari was up to until the day he died. And reportage of everytime someone went to or left Ari's private estates/islands in the Mediterranean region. It seemed it was on the nightly news every night while I was growing up in the 70's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
vets74 Donating Member (714 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #88
332. OIL MONEY =is_the_same_thing_as= DoD Contracting Money
Same everything.

Same "security" monsters, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:00 AM
Response to Original message
90. The Sun is a sleazy British tabloid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Adenoid_Hynkel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:02 AM
Response to Original message
91. Featuring this tabloid garbage on the front page severely hurts DU's credibility
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 08:25 AM by Adenoid_Hynkel
as of now, this is all purely tabloid speculation.
ABC, who got the tapes from Caroline, is denying this story:

ABC yesterday blasted a British newspaper report that the network is sitting on an explosive treasure-trove of Jacqueline Kennedy audio recordings that have her blaming President Lyndon B. Johnson for her husband's assassination and admitting to extramarital affairs.
ABC is airing never-before-heard tapes of Jackie in September as part of a special to mark 50 years since JFK's inauguration.
But the network denies they're anywhere near as sensational as reported in The Sunday Express.
"The tabloid reports about content of the tapes are total nonsense," the network's rep said. "ABC isn't releasing any content from those tapes until mid-September, at which time it will be clear how off base these reports are."


http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/tall_tales_of_tap...

Of course, this won't satisfy the folks who latched on to this tabloid story. Come September, they'll just stupidly claim "someone got to ABC," and that the the info was really in the tapes at first, but hidden later.
And if Caroline backs up ABC's report, they'll probably call her a sell-out and a liar.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ichingcarpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #91
94. give me a link to ABC denial
or is your post just your speculation?


And don't preach to me on ' DU's credibility'
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Adenoid_Hynkel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:13 AM
Response to Reply #94
97. edited and included
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 08:23 AM by Adenoid_Hynkel
happy?

ABC has their flaws, but I'll believe them over Rupert Murdoch's Sun any day of the week.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
seafan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:26 AM
Response to Reply #97
104. The NY Post is Murdoch's outfit. Not a reputable source. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Adenoid_Hynkel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:39 AM
Response to Reply #104
108. and so is the Sun, who is making the claims
One of his British rags with even less credibility than his U.S. outfits

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
seafan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:56 AM
Response to Reply #108
114. This story is also reported in the UK Express. Not a Murdoch paper. See post 88.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
LanternWaste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #108
201. I imagine we often rationalize a difference between...
I imagine we often rationalize a difference between six of one and half a dozen of the other when it suits our purposes...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Adenoid_Hynkel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #108
228. ABC statement also carried by NPR
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 01:26 PM by Adenoid_Hynkel
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/08/08/13912558...

and you can find the ABC quote in a number of sources. Google is your friend.

but hey, FOX Nation, the even less credible version of FOX News, agrees with Murdoch's fake media tabloids and think there's a story to tease, so the tin foil hatters can be happy.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:44 AM
Response to Reply #91
111. Dicussion of the greatest crime in our national history doesn't discredit DU
The murder of the last really liberal Democratic President changed the USA. This remains an unsolved murder.

But facts have been trickling out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgNfQYpS1gQ
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #91
163. sure does....
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
craigmatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:09 AM
Response to Original message
95. I've never believed the LBJ accusations. I'm more shocked that she cheated on JFK. Wow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bdamomma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #95
161. well JFK had his flings too.
Jackie was a very attractive woman. William Holden he was rather a hot guy then.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 01:44 AM
Response to Reply #95
304. What do you actually know about LBJ?
If you're at all interested in knowing how this nation was put in the

hands of corporate/fascists, try the Madelaine Brown tapes where she discusses

the meeting the night before the assassination at Clint Murchinson's house --

You'll find them at YouTube --

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Robbins Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:20 AM
Response to Original message
100. JFK
His assassination was conspiracy.Even Is OSwald was on the sixth floor shooting,and that Is still debatable,he was no long gunmen
and there were at least 2 other gunmen that day.

2 of best documantarys online on JFK assassination are The Men Who Killed Kennedy and JFK2.You will also learn there was a conspiracy
to cover up the assassination.The Men Who Killed Kennedy presents a good case the assassins were French hitmen.Those responsable
for crying out the assassination were probally the group of CIA and Mafia people who had been trying to Kill Castro.JFK2 makes
case of George Bush as one of the CIA people Involved.

As for Johnson's Involvement a strong case could be made of his Involvement In Conspiracy to cover up.The censored episode of Men
who killed kennedy makes case Johnson's possable Involement was to save his skin for his shady history In Texas being exposed.
Considering what we have gone through with Bush It Isn't so hard to believe.I don't believe eather Johnson or Bush was mastermind
behind the assassination.That was most likely one of the businessmen jackie mentioned.Just like we know Bush JR was no mastermind
behind what has gone on during his reign.

In 1934 a group of Right wing businessman conspired to overthrow Roosevelt.One theory of the Lincoln assassination that many Ignore
IS a radical group within Republican party Including members of Lincoln's own cabent conspired to assassinate him.Conspiracy Isn't
a recent thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:47 AM
Response to Reply #100
113. Here's link to the censored episode
Barr McClellan, various experts, LBJ's mistress Madeleine Brown are all on this. The info about Clint Murchison as the financier is interesting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgNfQYpS1gQ
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
liberalmike27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #113
203. Yea
Blood, Money, & Power is Barr McClellan's book on the subject. I've got it, good read, very convincing. But then I lived through it and it was my "feeling" that Johnson had something to do with it. It'll never be proved, obviously.

By the way, Johnson kept that plan on the runway, with no AC (as to the sweating comment), with Jackie on the plane too, waiting to be sworn in. He wanted Jackie in the picture as he felt it'd give him more legitimacy, and he cared more about that than her being able to grieve in silence. She gracefully accepted saying "It's the least I can do," but it must've been terrible to stand there hours after the assassination of her husband and watch the VP who she already didn't much care for, be sworn in to her dead husbands position.

As to nay-sayers, there will never be proof. But it's like those movies were someone comes in and asks who did it, and everyone points in a direction of one person who did it, trying to hide their finger from the sight of the perpetrator, but still, all the fingers point at him, in this case Johnson. It is as simple as blind ambition, a corrupt past, his thinking he would not likely have another chance as his family line died early (he had it in his mind and often said it), and he completely was in the pocket of big oil in Texas. Besides already making overtures at getting out of Vietnam, he was talking about removing the oil per barrel oil company compensation too. Johnson's biggest contributors throughout his whole political career, and he'd been a player since the 1930s from House, to Senate, was oil, big and small, in Texas. It all lines up, all the fingers are pointing in his direction.

Finding it hard to believe--well all I'm going to say is there are good people, and bad people. Money and power only amplify that ability to be good, or evil. Look at the Koch brothers. They spend their money to squeeze the last little bit of money from the poor and middle class, into their already fat coffers regardless of its effect on them. Evil, pure and simple avarice to the point of evil. Oprah, and Bil Gates, and the much-hated George Soros, on the other hand, have big money and power, and they tend to use it for good, not trying to screw the poor out of even more money. So anyone is capable. Don't think politicians are pure, as after all, their job in its purest form is to take money from the rich and corporations and pass laws to help them, and only them. And they have done their jobs now so magnificently as to have almost destroyed us from within. It's hard to believe they seem unaware that they have managed to do that, but I wonder sometimes if they do know they've over-stepped and done too much and if they just enjoy crushing people. Now I have a hard time believing that, but it seems like the evidence is great, think-tanks, ALEC, Ailes and his plot to disseminate misinformation all the way back to Nixon, well, it's all there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 01:49 AM
Response to Reply #113
305. Thank you - good reminder ....
Before the censorship actually came down on the History Channel --

they did have time to cover the Tunnheim Panel -- former Gov. John Tunnheim

head a panel for the 1992 JFK Classified Records Act --

History Channel made a documentary where John Tunnheim announces that the panel

saw the records and unanimously concluded that --

'OSWALD WAS EMPLOYED BY THE CIA WORKING ON HIGH LEVEL ASSIGNMENTS AND

PROBABLY ALSO FOR THE FBI' ---

As he says these words, the text appears below --

and it's repeated twice!!


That showed for about 4 months -- I was recording it but never got the end of it --

though I'm sure someone in America has it!!


Evidently, Tunnheim reported this to Congress in a secretd session sometime around the

Clinton impeachment!!


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
drokhole Donating Member (759 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:21 AM
Response to Original message
101. Wasn't there a quote LBJ allegedly made to his mistress the night before/day of the assassination?
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 08:21 AM by drokhole
Something to the effect of how Kennedy "wouldn't be a problem" for much longer? I'm pretty sure there are some clips of her online (google "LBJ mistress"), but I thought I read what it was exactly in the already mentioned "JFK: Why He Died..." by James Douglass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Robbins Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:25 AM
Response to Reply #101
103. Yep
He also told her after the assassination after rumors going around In Texas that It was the CIA and texas Oilmen behind JFK's
Assassination.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
drokhole Donating Member (759 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #103
219. 'After tomorrow those S.O.B.'s will never embarrass me again - that's no threat - that's a promise.'
Found it here. She also claimed that Johnson showed up late to "a party hosted by Clint Murchison, another business tycoon with close links to the Genovese mafia, on November 21st 1963, the night before the assassination. Those present at the event included J. Edgar Hoover, Clyde Tolson, John J. McCloy, Jack Ruby, George Brown (of Brown and Root), numerous mafia kingpins, several newspaper and TV reporters, and Richard Nixon."
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iamthebandfanman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 08:39 AM
Response to Original message
109. ive watched a few documentaries about LBJ the first 24 hours
and i have to say

they all painted him as an asshole who only cared about consolidating power behind himself...

lets not kid ourselves, LBJ and the Kennedys were not friends. by any meaning of the word.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Raschel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #109
138. Was it the one where they called Jackie out of the restroom on the plane so that she could stand
next to Johnson? She said, "of course, it's the least I can do."

She also sat in the hallway of the hospital in Texas alone and unattended while Kennedy was in the emergency room.

She then had to witness the FBI and Texas police tussle over the coffin and they had to run out of the hospital with the coffin.

I gained a whole new respect for her after seeing that show.

(P.S. The recollections were from legitimate witnesses.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 01:51 AM
Response to Reply #138
306. Think I missed that one -- !!! Who did it -- do you recall? When?
Presume a lot of this stuff hasn't been released to YouTube?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:18 AM
Response to Original message
118. According to James Douglass, LBJ was part of the coverup but not part of the assassination.
Although "mulsh" (above) has a point about the source. Is this story (of Caroline releasing these tapes) even true? Need to verify that.

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

In any case, James Douglass' book, "JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters," is the very best book on the assassination. He doesn't think Johnson knew and here is how he explains Johnson's role in the cover up.

Within days of the assassination, Hoover (FBI) told LBJ of the CIA's involvement, including their misdirection through the Russian embassy in Mexico to point to the Russians. The CIA and the MIC wanted the assassination to trigger a nuclear retaliation against Russia, because, as with the Cuban Missile Crisis the year before (in which JFK refused their advice to nuke Russia), they believed they had missile superiority over Russia and should take advantage of it, to wipe Russia off the face of the earth, which they thought would be worth it, even with 300,000 casualties here (their guestimate re Russian response). They murdered JFK because he refused to do it and instead initiated peace talks with Krushchev and Castro behind their backs. LBJ did not want to be forced into nuking Russia on false pretenses. So he, too, refused to do it, but he felt he had to cover up their trail and had to yield to the MIC in some way. This is why LBJ stated, three days after the assassination, "Now they can have their war." He was speaking of Vietnam.

Among LBJ's reasons for participating in the coverup was his fear that the American people would pressure him to retaliate if they believed that Russia was behind the assassination. This is how the plot became so very murky, as the coverup proceeded. They had to misdirect the misdirection to Russia. Pieces of it remained in tact. Other pieces were erased. This results in an unfathomable puzzle, with Oswald having been in Russia and so forth.

Douglass tracks the misdirections and the coverup misdirections in overwhelmingly convincing detail, with original research as well as pulling together all previous research. He really does make a slamdunk case for the CIA as the perpetrators. He fingers the perps up to Richard Helms (CIA chief of operations), but can't penetrate the darkness above that. It was probably Allen Dulles who gave the go-ahead, but Douglass is careful not to assert things that he doesn't have sufficient proof for. Dulles was the CIA Director whom JFK had fired for lying to him about the Bay of Pigs. (That failed invasion of Cuba was why Castro agreed to allow Soviet missiles on Cuban soil--to protect Cuba from further attack.)

Because this book is so good, and Douglass' research is so impeccable, and his understanding of that era is so profound, I tend toward his view of LBJ. Part of the coverup. Not part of the assassination.

It is the one point (and virtually the only one) on which I'm not totally convinced--but this may be because it is so difficult to forgive LBJ for the Vietnam War and for other reasons that are irrelevant to his guilt or innocence on the assassination. Douglass solves this unsolved murder. It was the CIA. Whether LBJ was involved or not is really not that relevant. The CIA, using its secret operations, its surveillance and black ops capabilities, and its networks within U.S. military, security and police forces, committed this crime, on behalf of the "military-industrial complex" whose power players wanted and needed a war to justify their existence and the enormous profits they make from the war industry. Douglass gives them this much, that some of the perps believed they were acting out of patriotism, and believed that JFK was literally a traitor for contacting Krushchev and Castro and proposing disarmament and world peace. That is what I mean by Douglass' profound understanding of that era. Patriotism had become THAT distorted during the McCarthyite anti-communist period, just a few years prior to JFK's administration, that the people involved at various levels of knowledge could convince themselves of this justification. It is also critically important to understand their even worse madness about the use of nukes (that was JFK's word for it--"madness"), how close we came to world armageddon and the CIA's and the war establishment's utter refusal to acknowledge what was going on in Russia with Krushchev. (He was standing against HIS military-industrial complex just as JFK was here!)

I tend to think that Douglass knows more about this matter than Jacqueline Kennedy could have known. Possibly she investigated the assassination. I don't really know. But her belief that LBJ was involved in the assassination (if true) is understandable. He looks guilty as hell--especially given his part in the coverup. (Lord, he put Allen Dulles on the Warren Commission--the CIA Director that JFK had fired!) It's difficult to gainsay someone--Jackie--who was so close to this event--her skirt was literally splattered with her husband's brains--and was so affected by it, probably more than anyone in the world. But I hope that these tapes of her views don't result in yet another misdirection--away from the CIA and toward "Texas oil men" and politicians. The latter may have been involved but the plot was such that ONLY the CIA could have done it. It is that secret government that we need to address, as a democracy-- if we are ever going to have a real democracy again--because it is through such secret and unaccountable power that the interests of war profiteers are served. It is this usurpation of OUR power to control OUR government, that occurred that day, that has so harmed our democracy.

Douglass is also brilliant at laying out the war vs. peace motive (with a lot of original research): He tracks JFK's personal, spiritual confrontation with the idea of nuking another country, as the unanimous Joint Chiefs were urging him to do. He had only Bobby supporting him. He refused to do it, and made backchannel contact with Krushchev and Castro (trying to get around the CIA) not only to end this dangerous confrontation but also to initiate a plan for nuclear disarmament and peaceful co-existence of the two world economic systems. Bear in mind that he had vowed to "smash the CIA into a thousand pieces" after the Bay of Pigs (CIA) invasion of Cuba. He knew that they were against him, that the Joint Chiefs were against him and that the entire MIC was against him, on his refusal to nuke Russia and he then went outside of their purview on his decision to basically call off "the Cold War." (He also subsequently tried to de-escalate the U.S. military presence in Vietnam. The CIA was also foiling him there.)

JFK intended to present his peace platform before us, in the 1964 election. And we would have voted for it, overwhelmingly. I know this because I voted in that election. It was my first vote for president. I remember it well. LBJ presented himself as the "peace candidate" --a lie he told even while he was preparing for full scale war in Vietnam. He won that election in one of the biggest presidential landslides in our history, on a platform of peace. The people voted for PEACE, in overwhelming numbers. But LBJ was lying. The tragedy is that JFK would not have been lying.

The choice of a genuine platform of peace was violently taken away from us, by our own secret government--by a specific agency of it--acting for our own war profiteers. The fakery in our public life has only grown worse, year after year, since that day, as the abominations of war and war profiteering have piled up, one upon another. We've been living inside the twisted mirror of Dallas ever since then--with multiple trick mirrors added to it--to keep us looking away from the real problem, that we have no control of our government--that it is run "of, by and for" the war profiteers, who fear democracy so much that they've now installed corporate-run 'TRADE SECRET' vote 'counting' machines, everywhere in the U.S., to keep control of us. The 'TRADE SECRET' voting machines were a "gift" from the Anthrax Congress in the same month--the same month!--as the "Iraq War Resolution" (Oct '02). They fear our desire for peace THAT much. And this fear goes way back--to Nov. 22, 1963.

James Douglass has two more books planned--on the RFK and MLK assassinations. All three murders occurred within the space of five years and I believe that all were related to this internal coup d'etat about war and peace--the war profiteers choosing for us that our society would be about war, not peace. I don't know what Douglass is going to say about these other assassinations. This is my own opinion. All three murders were intended to kill our hopes for a peaceful country. They failed, and that is why we have seen ever-increasing mechanisms of control. Our hopes for a peaceful country remained alive through Feb '03 (nearly 60% of Americans opposed to the Iraq War, all polls)--40 years later. They remain alive today in the hearts of most Americans. But they are still being grievously frustrated by unaccountable secrecy--now in the voting system as well as within our stiflingly secret government, its security agencies and its behind-the-scenes distribution of our treasury and complete usurpation of our sovereignty. The multinational corporations and war profiteers are in such ascendancy, they don't need the CIA to assassinate presidents any more. No candidate who does not agree to be controlled by them will get anywhere near the White House.

That is "why it matters"--the phrase in the title of Douglass' book. We have not yet seen the end of the consequences of Nov. 22, 1963. They grow more ominous every day, on every matter of importance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Myrina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:28 AM
Response to Reply #118
125. +100
Very succinctly explained, thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #118
207. I concur. It Is Through Poppy Bush that the Oil and the CIA Connect
and the conspiracy is complete.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Raksha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #118
247. +1000 Thank you...that's so good it deserves to be an OP in itself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 02:05 AM
Response to Reply #118
307. hmmm.. Quite UNBELIEVABLE ... of course LBJ was involved ...
The coup on JFK and our government could not have gone forward without his

participation and his presence in the White House to keep the cover up going --

Douglass must be quite an ass -- sorry to read this because I have been looking over

the book but had no idea that he actually is pushing that opinion via the book!!


Had the assassination not occurred, LBJ would have been in jail, for one --

LBJ also has a long history of murders behind him both personal and professional!!


If Douglass has truly made this attempt to exonerate LBJ from the plot then it could

have been the SOLE reason for writing the book, imo -- !!

Just more cover up --


I tend to think that Douglass knows more about this matter than Jacqueline Kennedy could have known. Possibly she investigated the assassination.

There were many attempts by the family to investigate -- RFK immediately sent someone

from the CIA close to the family in to find out what happened -- the guy came out 24

hours later saying it was a very powerful coup which he could not penetrate.


Also "Farewell, America" written by French investigators may have been requested by the

Kennedy family?


Additionally, Onasssis also seems to have paid for a very expensive investigation --

Yet -- it would still require the power of the presidency to uncover the coup !!



LBJ wanted no investigation!! Quite like W Bush after 9/11!!

LBJ was finally forced into appointing at the very least the Warren Commission --


And certatinly the CIA was involved --

However, certainly the plotters are Texans -- oil/Mafia/H. L. Hunt and other wealthy Texans

Think one of the best and simplest movies on this came out in the early 70's --

"Executive Action" which starred Robt. Ryan and Burt Lancaster --

there's since another moview by that name!

It's shown on TV every now and then --


The CIA couldn't be filthier -- founded with ex-Nazis brought in under Dulles' "Project

Paperclip" -- they took money from any rw source -- including the KKK and Nazis.

They funded rw members of Congress to keep them in power --


Oil is a national security issue -- therefore involving the MIC and CIA --

That's why you saw such gentle treatment of BP over their "spill" -- !!

No oil/no war -- no profits -- no illegitimate control over the nation --





Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
peacetalksforall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:51 AM
Response to Original message
136. I am currently obsessed with quotes from our recent past - 100 years. And
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 09:54 AM by peacetalksforall
I'm especially blown away by some of the things Kennedy said about industry and other things. I compare it with quotes from members of the Bilderberg, Council on Foreign Relations, Tri-Lateral Commission (with the latter being a sub-set of the first). Learning that all the top people in the State Department going back about 4x years are members of all, one, or two of these three entities, especially CFR ........ learning that the three emtities have vetted all P and VP nominees and winners for decades, including Carter, Clinton, Gore AND Leiberman, Obmama ........ learning that H Clinton and Joe Biden are full Bilderberg members and Bill a member of CFR ...... learning that the DLC was loaded down with cooperating members of these three entities ...... I now know that as much as I've tried to follow what is happening to my country ...... I've actually been in a whitewashed existence. Reading JFK quotes in 2010 and 2011 have stunned me.

Somehow, my bs meter has not gone off when reading and hearing his quotes. The quotes as I understand them now are in direct opposition to the agenda that the Bilderberg, CFR, TLC has for this country, the rest of the world, and themselves.

This was a human take out by people in high places. I believe Johnson could have been in on it, but not running it. It is a waste of time to keep talking about Oswald. It is not a waste of time to investigate whose fingers pulled triggers, but it is MUCH MORE IMPORTANT to figure out why.

We have learned plenty in the last couple of months, we've been shocked. But what we're experiencing has been in a plan for decades preceding JFK. Their new world is coming together and it wrecks the U.S. the way our parents and grand parents built it.

As to the Jackie quote. If all this is true about a trade-off involving Caroline (and I have doubts), it is a quote in time and it is absolutely not a case for proof as a simple statement. If she did speak, she could have been voicing an opinion, a suspicion, or based on a case that was presented to her. Knowing that their were grand holes in his protection and in the planning of the trip, we would have to know the whole story - of who provided the proof is there was a case made to Jackie.

Spend your energy on studying today's rulers. Don't concentrate on who was taking a revenge on him - study what he wanted to do or was planning on doing and how it would have conflicted with the grand military industrial complex that we were warned about by Butler and Eisenhower and by Goldwater - soon after Eisenhower.



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #136
212. I agree. LBJ's involvement (or not) is a side-track. It's much more important to understand WHY
it happened. That's why Douglass stresses this in his title ("JFK and the Unspeakable: WHY He Died and WHY It Matters"). And he really nails both--as well as who did it (the planner and decider--the CIA). It's illuminating what he says about LBJ--his reasons for agreeing to the coverup--because this explains very well why the true narrative of the plot is so elusive and confused. They weren't just trying to cover up who did it but they were ALSO trying to cover the tracks the CIA had laid to Russia.

Another thing Douglass is brilliant at--and which rings so true to me, having lived through that era--is that JFK was CHANGING. (So was Bobby--under the influence of his wife Ethel who was corresponding with the anti-nuke Trappist monk, Thomas Merton). I remember JFK's speeches as a presidential candidate. Reviewing those earliest speeches now they strike me as ridiculous (the "missile gap" and all that)--he was playing to the "military-industrial complex." But he changed very dramatically by the time he was assassinated, on the issues of war and peace. He started out as a "Cold Warrior." He did NOT end as one. He gave a speech, toward the end, to the UN, about world peace, that caused a friend of mine to pull over on the freeway and weep! And this was an Air Force jet pilot! He literally wept to hear the President speak of world peace. It was a "new day." The dark night of the McCarthyite era was over. Nuclear armageddon had been averted. Douglass stresses that moment as the pivot point in JFK's own view of the "Cold War." He didn't want any president including himself ever to be put in that position again--of having to decide whether or not to incinerate millions of people including the millions of our own who would die in the retaliation. (They didn't know about "nuclear winter" at the time--that everyone would have died, the whole planet. That realization came much later, from Carl Sagan.) So JFK determined to change the paradigm. His efforts included the first "Nuclear Test Ban Treaty," the "wheat deal" with Russia (they'd had a bad harvest and many were starving--helping Russia was unheard of at that time), his backchannels to Krushchev (an extensive correspondence) and Castro (JFK told him he understood the reasons for the Cuban Revolution), his de-escalation effort in Vietnam (late in his presidency), his pullout of Turkey (the deal that ended the Cuban Missile Crisis--U.S. bases in Turkey were a threat to Russia, and Krushchev needed this concession to get HIS warmongers to back off), bending our great war machine toward peaceful purposes (putting men on the moon, for instance), and more.

Kennedy's ABILITY TO CHANGE was the quality in him that was so inspiring. True also of Bobby. Bobby began as a McCarthyite counsel. He, too, ended up far from where he began. This is true of the whole culture. But they were the first and foremost leaders of the U.S. "establishment" to be responsive to the change that was occurring. It's very important to know this, in evaluating what happened to both of them. I've seen people point to various early policies or actions of JFK (for instance, the initial escalations in Vietnam) as if to "prove" that he was just a MIC pawn like every other president (so why care if he was shot by some nut?!). What Douglass does is to explain and document JFK's dramatically changing views and how he got into the gunsights of the MIC. He was not murdered for NO REASON. He was murdered for a very specific reason--he was turning against war and toward peace.

One other item I want to clarify: It was JFK's intention "to smash the CIA into a thousand pieces" after the 1964 election--that is, after the mandate for peace that he expected to get from the American people (and that he was so right in predicting). His assassins (who didn't have 'TRADE SECRET' voting machines in those days) were anxious to prevent that mandate from being bestowed--and, of course, in LBJ's mouth, a year later, peace was a lie. LBJ really was a pawn of the MIC. JFK started off as one--but turned toward peace--a genuine turn--and that is what got him killed.

If you are reading speeches, compare first speeches and last speeches of JFK, and you will see it for yourself. There is other evidence but the change is quite discernible in his speeches as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Zen Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 09:58 AM
Response to Original message
140. I'm in the middle of reading LBJ: Mastermind of JFK's Assassination
It was written by Phillip F. Nelson, and it is mind-blowing. LBJ didn't act alone, but he acted in self-interest with other self-interested individuals and entities. I downloaded in on Kindle and I can't stop reading. It's the story of all time.

And, just for the record, please note that MLK and RFK were killed during the LBJ years. Johnson got JFK's civil rights legislation through to cover his own ass. He initiated the Great Society to cover the war in Vietnam. It was the price he paid to the CIA for their "assistance."

Johnson himself was a megalomaniac who had multiple people killed on his rise to power. Including his own sister. I'm eagerly awaiting Caro's final volume on LBJ, but I've often thought it is complete and Caro won't have it published until after his death. These tapes may change that ... I hope.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
nashville_brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:44 AM
Response to Reply #140
160. great book suggestion! running to iPad now -- :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
avebury Donating Member (455 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #140
209. When were you able to buy the book for the Kindle?
I don't see that option available on amazon.com.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 02:14 AM
Response to Reply #140
308. Interesting ....
I'm in the middle of reading LBJ: Mastermind of JFK's Assassination

Is it in the book stores -- paperback -- where did you buy it? Library?


And, just for the record, please note that MLK and RFK were killed during the LBJ years. Johnson got JFK's civil rights legislation through to cover his own ass. He initiated the Great Society to cover the war in Vietnam. It was the price he paid to the CIA for their "assistance."

Johnson himself was a megalomaniac who had multiple people killed on his rise to power. Including his own sister. I'm eagerly awaiting Caro's final volume on LBJ, but I've often thought it is complete and Caro won't have it published until after his death. These tapes may change that ... I hope.


Completely agree ---

Pierre Salinger tells us that he and Bill Moyers thought that LBJ was "clinically psychotic" --

I'm sure you've familiar with the psychiatrist paid to listen to his confessions and

keep his secrets?

Though that Caro had finished his work on LBJ -- last volume I saw he seemed to chicken out!

Didn't know about his having a volume held until after his death! Wow!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
153. maybe she released them because teddy had passed
maybe she thought the truth should come out now that all the brothers were gone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 11:29 PM
Response to Reply #153
326. Weird how Teddy said in the book he spent the last year writing...

...that he thought Oswald did it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:49 AM
Response to Original message
162. well there`s NO confrimation by a CREDITABLE source...
that any of what the english rags reported is true.

maybe this is closer to what is really the truth...

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/entertainment/2011/08/ja...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
zappaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #162
234. The ATLANTIC and ABC are both in on the conspiracy.
there can be no other explanation
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hepburn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:52 AM
Response to Original message
164. Wow...Jackie-O and Bill Holden...
...that's what fantasy thoughts are made of! :wow:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
grahamhgreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:53 AM
Response to Original message
167. There is little doubt that enough evidence exists to re-open the investigation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #167
311. And the USHR Committee that did the last investigation recommendated that -- !!!
That was back in the 1970's as I recall --

Very powerful forces still in control of the cover up -- !!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
AlbertCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:54 AM
Response to Original message
168. Gossip gossip gossip
:boring:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 11:19 AM
Response to Original message
182. Recommended.
Most of those tapes were made around the same time as Arthur's tapes with the Attorney General. The family was suspicious. Jackie, like Robert, found LBJ to be a crude, vulgar, opportunistic, pathological liar. JFK had joked with her about LBJ's inability to tell the truth on the eve of his death.

Parts of the family had Moynihan oversee an investigation. This would become linked with the French intelligence investigation. Both pointed towards Texas oil as financing Dallas. And, of course, there had been previous attempts in both Chicago and Florida in the previous weeks, which did not become operational.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
harmonicon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 11:30 AM
Response to Original message
184. This is tabloid BS and has no place in the "news" section. nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
stopbush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 11:43 AM
Response to Original message
188. And lots of people believe in gods & ghosts. So what?
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 11:43 AM by stopbush
LBJ was a great president, A GREAT president who put it all on the line with his advancement of civil rights and the Great Society. To see his name constantly dragged through the mud with these nutty allegations that he had anything to do with JFK's murder makes people like Karl Rove dance in the streets.

And don't tell me to read this or that JFK conspiracy tract or whatever. I've read them all and they're bullshit.

I can't wait for the Tom Hanks-backed miniseries based on Bugliosi's "Reclaiming History." It's slated for release in 2013 to coincide with the 50th anniversary of JFK's murder. Hopefully, it will change minds and pull at least a few people back into the sane column when it comes to the truth behind JFK's murder.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
zappaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #188
196. +1 n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
LanternWaste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #188
202.  I imagine we often refer to those who agree with us as 'sane'
"a few people back into the sane column when it comes to the truth behind JFK's murder..."

I imagine we often refer to those who agree with us as 'sane'-- it wonderfully minimizes people who believe different than ourselves...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
drokhole Donating Member (759 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #202
214. +2
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
zappaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #202
225. believing in a JFK assasination conpiracy doesn't mean one isn't sane.
just ill-informed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
stopbush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #225
235. True, until it lapses into the kind of nutty zealotry that one often sees displayed,
usually because people confuse Oliver Stone's fictional account with a history lesson.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 11:47 PM
Response to Reply #235
312. Well, you can accept our "history" of white male propaganda ....
or you can actually think about real investigations by knowledgable and honest

men -- like Jim Garrison and Jim Marrs and the many others who have looked at

this coup on our president and our people's government --

Peter Dale Scott -- Harrison Livingstone -- Arthur Schlesinger --


Of course it's hard to compete with a Commission headed by Allan Dulles who gave

us "Project Paperclip" -- and who had helped put Hitler in business --

but I'll stick with former Gov. John Tunnheim and the panel which actually looked

at the classified records -- 1992 JFK Classified Records Act -- and told us of

their unanimous agreement that --

'OSWALD WAS EMPLOYED BY THE CIW WORKING ON HIGH LEVEL ASSIGNMENTS AND

PROBBLY ALSO FOR THE FBI' --

Sen. Yarborough, Clint Hill and the many other witnesses who were there -- as was

Mrs. Kennedy.




Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Drew Richards Donating Member (507 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 11:47 AM
Response to Original message
191. We should probably deport the Murdochs, Kochs, Cheneys and Bush's...Just to be sure...


:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
roamer65 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:01 PM
Response to Original message
197. I have no problem believing LBJ was involved.
LBJ had a LOT to gain from JFK's murder.

He was embroiled in scandal in 1963 and very likely to be dumped as JFK's running mate in 1964.

How do you make all these problems go away? Become President.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #197
215. LBJ was a consummate politician and had his fingers on a lot of strings
attached to wallets. He would have been fine. I think this gossip columnist or whoever they are is looking at the wrong bunch of Texas businessmen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 11:49 PM
Response to Reply #197
313. +1 -- simple and to the point--!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Fuddnik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:09 PM
Response to Original message
200. Breaking: LBJ believed Jackie whacked JFK.
And I believe in the Easter Bunny.

Film at 11:00.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
RegieRocker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-11 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #200
327. We don't need comments from the monkey crew.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
avebury Donating Member (455 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
217. An interesting read is Plausible Denial by Mark Lane
"Lane describes a court case that offers new evidence implicating the CIA in Kennedy's death. Lane was the defense lawyer for a small weekly newspaper that had been sued by E. Howard Hunt for defamation of character when it published an article by an ex-CIA officer asserting that Hunt and the CIA were responsible for the assassination. Among Lane's more interesting revelations: President Bush apparently served as a CIA operative who was involved in the Bay of Pigs fiasco; Gerald Ford, while a member of the Warren Commission, passed confidential information on to the FBI. Lane's book, which will undoubtedly be controversial (Lane was unable to find a major publisher willing to touch it), is a substantive contribution to the field. Highly recommended for most libraries."
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
zappaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #217
223. if by "interesting"
Edited on Mon Aug-08-11 01:08 PM by zappaman
you mean complete and utter bullshit, I would agree.

Lane's book is chock full of lies and selective editing of the WCR.

For example, the way Lane wrote about Jack Ruby's testimony led readers to believe that Ruby was denied the opportunity to reveal the existence of a conspiracy.

Here's what Ruby told Warren:

'No subversive organization gave me any idea. No underworld person made any effort to contact me. It all happened that Sunday morning...If you don't take me back to Washington tonight to give me a chance to prove to the President that I am not guilty, then you will see the most tragic thing that will ever happen...All I want is a lie detector test...All I want to do is tell the truth, and that is all. There was no conspiracy.'

Here's what Lane uses to firm up his conspiracy angle:
"All I want to do is tell the truth, and that is all."

A sleazebag who has made plenty of money on JFK's blood.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 11:54 PM
Response to Reply #217
314. Excellent book -- read it quite some time ago -- and other witnesses also put Howard Hunt
in Dallas at that time -- can't think of the Cuban CIA recruit -- Maria something --

who was a former mistress of Castro? Been a long time since I've read some of this stuff

so forgive the vagueness. When you get away from the subject for a while, takes a bit

for the info to return!

She stated that she had travelled with Hunt and others involved in the assassination.

Would have to look for notes on this or find the book again to refresh my memory of all

who were involved. If I recall correctly, she either succeeded in abandoning the group

or tried to do so???? Do you recall any of this?


But main point -- Howard Hunt wasn't at home watching TV reports on the assassination with

his kids!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
pam4water Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 01:06 PM
Response to Original message
222. Sounds like a desperate attempt to divert people attention from the UK hacking scandal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Adenoid_Hynkel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 01:20 PM
Response to Original message
227. I see this topic was finally moved
off the front page and out of news
good call
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
laylah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 01:38 PM
Response to Original message
232. Though I respect the decisions of the Mods,
they have a job I would never want...this is bullshit! Relegating this story to the dungeon is wrong, just plain wrong, IMVHO!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Raksha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #232
241. I agree...what does it take to get this story out of CT territory?
If Caroline Kennedy actually releases her mother's tapes as per the articles, does it then finally a legitimate news story?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
zappaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #241
242. because it is bullshit
BOSTON -- ABC News says there is no truth to a report that Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis believed that Vice President Lyndon Johnson was involved in the assassination of her husband, President John F. Kennedy.

The claim was made by the London Daily Mail on its website Sunday night.

The newspaper cited tape recordings it said would show that the former first lady felt that Johnson, who became president, was part of a plot to assassinate Kennedy.


some people are soooo gullible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #241
244. Okay, let's start with a quote from Ms. Kennedy Onassis

Got one?

No, you don't.

So there is no basis for the story in the first place at the moment.

Secondly, a recording to the effect of what Ms. Kennedy Onassis believed at a particular point in time is evidence of what she believed at that particular point in time.

You can play a recording of her saying she thinks the Pope is the head of all Christians, and it's not going to make me Catholic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Raksha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #244
246. That's true - there are no direct quotes.
I'd think even a couple of British tabloids would be afraid to attribute a story like this to Caroline Kennedy if there were no truth to it. Aren't they afraid of lawsuits?

The story got me to look at some interesting links with a lot more credibility than the Daily Mail, so I guess it isn't a total waste.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #246
248. They didn't attribute anything to Caroline Kennedy

WTF are you talking about? They didn't say anything actionable about Caroline Kennedy.

Again, please, what did Ms. Kennedy Onassis say that has you all fired up?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-12-11 12:03 AM
Response to Reply #246
317. Why would there be quotes when the tapes haven't been aired yet?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-12-11 12:02 AM
Response to Reply #244
316. LBJ is one of the prime co-conspirators in the coup -- couldn't have been done without him!!
There isn't an investigation which doesn't make that completely obvious --

And, seemingly all of that was known and recognized by most in DC even on the

evening of the investigation when most of the "names" of the co-conspirators

were on the lips of dinner guests and those attending functions.


Additionally, Mrs. Kennedy gave us very precise details of the woulds JFK suffered --

completely ignored by the Warren Commission -- because it was the work of a lone nut!!!

In a report by the Warren Commission actually written by an ex-Nazi propagandist who

was then working for the CIA!



:nuke:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 11:57 PM
Response to Reply #232
315. +1 -- too many taboo subjects -- and it does severely limit the ability of DU'ers to
understand the full scope of what is going on in the world --

from JFK coup to Israel/Palestine -- and re "Ancient Aliens" --

Think this would make a good topic for discussion ---



You can see the differences -- and HIGH INTEREST -- in this thread which

was able to spend a bit of time in GD --

vs what happens when the threads are immediately thrown into the 9/11 pit!

Just look at the OVERALL INTEREST IN THE THREAD!!

I don't see even one "ignore" on the thread -- !!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
demguy72340 Donating Member (50 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 05:06 PM
Response to Original message
251. interesting
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
dflprincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-11 10:08 PM
Response to Original message
256. This could be interesting but I'm afraid the fact is
that if Jackie said anything truly explosive the MSM will not let us hear it. She could have told the location of and combination to a vault where she left all the proof required to prove who killed JFK, but if she so much as hinted that she thought William Holden was a good looking man (much less confessed to an affair) - that is all we'll hear about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-12-11 12:04 AM
Response to Reply #256
318. Agree with your analysis -- but will try to stay optimistic--!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-09-11 01:52 AM
Response to Original message
257. Thanks for the shiny new object, Rupert!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-09-11 11:44 PM
Response to Original message
262. Just checked the link and note SUN's attention is directed to the "affairs" -- !!
Leading historian Arthur Schlesinger Jnr recorded the tapes with her months after her husband was shot in 1963.
Jackie, who died in 1994, banned their release until 50 years after her death. But her daughter Caroline is said to have unveiled them early to ABC in exchange for the US TV network dropping a drama on the Kennedys.


Always like to see this info coming out --

and wondering if there is going to be a way for the rw to blunt the info re LBJ

and the coup?



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-11 12:32 AM
Response to Original message
289. Congratulations on this post -- notice that there's not one IGNORE on it ....
because it got a good start evidently in GD?

Thanks!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-12-11 12:13 PM
Response to Original message
319. Evelyn Lincoln listed LBJ as her first suspect.
The assassinated President's personal secretary made the notation on the flight from Dallas:

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/jfk_aide_unusual_...



http://justiceforkennedy.blogspot.com/2010/12/evelyn-li...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-13-11 10:43 PM
Response to Reply #319
320. Didn't know Lincoln had done that -- She was right about LBJ, Nixon, CIA ...John Birchers ...KKK
Edited on Sat Aug-13-11 10:46 PM by defendandprotect
Only way the RW can rise is via political violence -- !!


And, just want to mention, pretty brave of Lincoln to have done that if she was

on the same plane with LBJ --


The private investigators have done a fantastic job -- and many very quickly -- to

let us know who did this -- but many also say that the evening of the assassiantion

many in DU had the names of the conspirators on their lips!

They knew --

and we pretty much knew it was LBJ -- and a long list of RW -- from racists to

Koch Bros. John Birchers -- to Nixon and to CIA -- etal --

TREASONOUS right wing --





Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 12:27 AM
Response to Original message
321. When are we going to hear these tapes .... ????
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
zappaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-04-11 12:31 AM
Response to Reply #321
322. ah, yes
the cry of the clueless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
k-robjoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-07-11 08:31 AM
Response to Reply #321
323. Next Tuesday
On ABC :

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/jacqueline-kennedy-word...

( Dont know if they will get into the assassination. )

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 12:49 AM
Response to Reply #323
324. Thank you -- !!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MinM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-11 07:26 AM
Response to Original message
329. Who is Philip Zelikow? The fix is in ...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Philip D. Zelikow has come full circle.

From a Warren Commission apologist.

To running the 9/11 Commission Cover-Up.

"Fixer" of voting machine glitches.

Back to JFK, by way of "editing" these tapes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MinM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-12-11 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #329
330. More show hype here...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
vets74 Donating Member (714 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:27 AM
Response to Original message
331. That $44,000 our Saigon embassy paid the two Diem killers ??? And November 22nd ?
Edited on Wed Sep-21-11 09:30 AM by vets74
is thought to have figured in with the Dallas execution.

JFK thought he could have people killed. He and his Harvard Cabinet and his NSA were functional idiots when it came to violence. Saying "No !" to bombing Cuba during the missile crisis did not give JFK a license to emulate James Bond.

Every Diem-clone dictator in the world got one helluva wake up call. JFK's guys didn't anticipate these effects.

At the time the American media never so much as mentioned Taiwan. But they were the ones making billions by exploiting the American security umbrella to build light-manufacturing plants all over the Rim. Markos in the Philippines was their top guy with Diem and the rest looking to cash in.

FOLLOW THE MONEY.

Btw: the shooting feat ascribed to Lee Harvey on that November 22nd was impossible. Flat out impossible.

Maryland State Police set up a test site. They tried to replicate what happened. Well, with a dozen sharpshooters taking their turns -- the best shooters from Mid-Atlantic area -- nobody got even close to it on the first pass. That's with the shooters getting to observe the earlier trials and get the pacing down ahead of their attempts.

They finally got one shooter to make close hits on his third try. LHO would have had one try. That's also after the rifle was match-level aligned, the scope was tweaked, and the shooter got his preferred shooting jacket and bracing setup.


LHO had practiced shooting at a static target. No one ever implied that he had worked against moving targets. A decade earlier he was pretty good at shooting the static targets. That's not going to do much for you, trying to hit a receding left-to-right moving target.

Finally, the last rifle shot on that November 22nd was the most accurate shot.

No way that was LHO or any other shooter drawing over. Rapid fire rifle shots deteriorate in quality -- no exceptions.

Kennedy, Connolly, and Taghe were all shot. That's where the FBI invented the Magic Bullet nonsense.

The impossible Magic Bullet is asserted routinely in official creations to support a theory of three rifle shots. A zig-zag bullet path is part of that fiction -- taking out Kennedy and Connolly, plus a magic touch to hit Taghe.

The most likely computer tracing model for the attack has 5 bullets (at the least 4) -- based on the known impacts and work by the wargaming community. Two or at most three rifles, as well. The individual shots, themselves, are much more difficult, for example, than the single shot that killed MLK. Shots and echos on Dallas Police Channel 1 sound recording on Dictatape match up to the Zapruder film -- which provided something of a feast during the early days of computerized geometry.

Two of the primary rifle shots were fired within a tenth of a second. Exit the Oswald Theory.

That's not a motorcycle backfire. Wrong energy spectral density.

Of course giving up on the Oswald Theory would risk opening up the modern Pandora's Box of blood sport politics. We commoners are told to perform psychological denial when confronted with political assassination. Evidence is forbidden. That DP Channel 1 audio track was suppressed from public access until 1978. The Warren Commission had no access to it -- apparently no knowledge that it existed. Denial is a way to go.

Of course with a new president in the White House, 1964 was a time for moving forward. Not for recriminations or looking backward. Then there was that madman warmonger, "you know he might" Barry Goldwater to be defeated in 1968.... No time for getting serious about the presidential succession... don'tcha know.

Back early on Merry England had one of these succession disasters. Shakespeare's Henry IV... father of Prince Hal... returning for a curtain call as Lyndon Johnson ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Aug 02nd 2014, 12:13 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC