Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team

Douglas Caddy

Members
  • Content count

    5,038
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Douglas Caddy

  1. http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-says-hell-allow-kennedy-assassination-files-to-be-released/ar-AAtNJa8?li=BBnbfcL&ocid=UE07DHP
  2. CIA’s former senior officer for Congressional affairs was convicted of lying to Congress Clair George’s eight month tenure effectively killed the Agency’s communications to Congress Written by Emma Best https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2017/jul/05/cia-clair-george/?utm_content=bufferac97e&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer
  3. Mort Sahl on JFK

    Mort Sahl on JFK https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLBINnEpNu5u7tdX0bXFBCzKFSL_ehDaWQ
  4. No, I do not know enough about its details to have formed an opinion.
  5. About James Angleton and the author of the Monster Plot Report https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2017/oct/20/angleton-monster-plot/
  6. I am posting my legal file on this subject in the JFK Assassination Topic of the Forum because the events described within it initially came about when Roger Stone contacted me in 2012. He requested any information that I might have on LBJ, which I was pleased to provide. In 2013 Stone published his book, The Man Who Killed Kennedy: The Case Against LBJ, which became a best-seller. In his book Stone credits me as a primary source for information, as is disclosed in the file. Thus, in a roundabout way JFK five decades after his murder is providing from the grave a nexus of how the 2016 presidential election was rigged. Don’t you think he is pleased at doing this? ************************************ DOUGLAS CADDY ATTORNEY-AT-LAW HOUSTON, TEXAS Member, Texas Bar since 1979 and District of Columbia Bar since 1970 MEMORANDUM TO THE LEGAL FILE Subject: Roger Stone, Lyndon LaRouche and Russia influencing the 2016 Presidential election Date: August 22, 2017 This memo to the file brings up to date what has occurred since I sent my letter of December 10, 2016, to FBI Director James Comey and my subsequent letter of June 27, 2017, to Special Counsel Robert Mueller in regard to the above subject. In my letter to FBI Director Comey I stated that “I knew Roger Stone of the Trump presidential campaign forty years ago in Washington. Because of this Harley Schlanger of the LaRouche organization, whom I also knew, earlier this year asked me to arrange a meeting between him and Stone. I agreed to do so. Such a meeting took place in February [2016]. I was not present at the meeting. “It is my impression that as a result of that February meeting the LaRouche organization agreed to use its extensive Russian contacts to open up a back channel for the Trump campaign to communicate directly to Russian intelligence. This ultimately led to Russian intelligence hacking the emails of the Democratic National Committee, which became a major issue in the presidential campaign and continues to do so to this day. Stone may have played a role in Wikileaks being given the hacked emails for distribution to the public. “Harley Schlanger and other LaRouche leaders interviewed Stone on a LaRouche radio program on a number of occasions during the course of the presidential campaign.” With my letter to Director Comey I attached a number of emails that I had received from Schlanger and Stone on this matter. Relevant quotations from some of these follow later in this memo. In addition I sent copies of my letter to Director Comey to President Obama and CIA Director Peter Goss as a safeguard that it would not be deep-sixth. After President Trump fired Director Comey in May 2017, which led to the appointment of Special Counsel Mueller, I wrote Mr. Mueller on June 27, 2017 in part as follows: “On December 10, 2016, I sent the enclosed letter with its email attachments to FBI Director James Comey about the above referenced matter. I never heard back from him and hence I am writing you. My motivation in doing so is because I fear that our democracy was severely endangered by Russian influence in the 2016 presidential election. Alarmingly, this Russian threat is unabated. The continued existence of the United States as a free nation is at stake. “Here is a brief summary of my letter to Director Comey: In January 2016 Harley Schlanger of the LaRouche organization contacted me to request that I set up a meeting for him with Roger Stone of the Trump Campaign. Their meeting was held in Austin, Texas, in February 2016. I was unable to attend but my impression is that as a result of that meeting the LaRouche organization agreed to use its extensive Russian contacts to open up a back channel for the Trump campaign to communicate directly with Russian intelligence. “Since writing my December 10 letter to Director Comey I have uncovered the following information that may corroborate the contents of that letter: “A month before Schlanger contacted me to set up the meeting with Stone, a LaRouche delegation sympathetic to Russia attended the RT anniversary dinner in Moscow in December 2015 where Premier Putin was seated next to General Flynn. For confirmation see the bottom of page 15 and top of page 16 of the famous Christopher Steele British Dossier. Schlanger may have been among those who attended. There are essentially five persons who lead the LaRouche organization today: Lyndon LaRouche (age 94), his wife, Helga, Jeffrey Steinberg, Harley Schlanger and Anton Chaitkin. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3259984-Trump-Intelligence-Allegations.html “Jeffrey Steinberg participated in an annual Economic Conference in Moscow in March 2016. https://larouchepac.com/20160328/eir-participates-moscow-economic-forum “In November 2016, Roger Stone interviewed Lyndon LaRouche on his radio program. https://larouchepac.com/20161121/lyndon-larouche-radio-interview-roger-stone https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBx6uHA05gg “I am writing you because you possess the investigative power and authority to determine if any of the information provided in this letter and my prior letter to Director Comey merits further investigation. It may or may not. As a private citizen I am in no position to make that determination. However, I believe it is my solemn duty both as a private citizen and an attorney who is a member of the District of Columbia and Texas Bars to call this matter to your attention.” When I sent my letter to Mr. Mueller, I also sent copies of it to Senator Mark Warner of the Senate Intelligence Committee and Congressman Adam Schiff of the House Intelligence Committee. ABOUT LAROUCHE Here is the link to obtain update viewpoints from the LaRouche organization: https://larouchepac.com/updates Three of the brightest and most knowledgeable persons I have ever met are Jeffrey Steinberg, Harley Schanger and Anton Chaikin. However, it is well known that Lyndon LaRouche is the ultimate decider on all policy matters and his word overrides those in the organization whose views may differ. The Houston Chronicle of November 7, 1982, published an article titled, “The man who ‘perfected’ Marx: LaRouche collects money, works at making folks over ‘in my own image.’” The article states that, “former members say LaRouche is omnipotent within the organization.” It further declares that, “According to his 1979 autobiography, The Power of Reason, LaRouche was born into a Quaker family in New Hampshire in 1922 and had only two friends until late in high school. He says the reason for his lack of friends was that his mental capabilities exceeded those of his peers….As a young man, he joined a socialist group where he ‘perfected’ the theories of Marx.’” I find myself in agreement with some of the policies espoused by the LaRouche organization, such as constructing a modern, transnational “silk road” and reform of the U.S. financial system, including Glass-Steagall reinstatement and creation of a national credit institution for infrastructure and manufacturing. Where I vehemently differ with the group is its alleged role in assisting Russia in influencing the 2016 presidential election. This issue is paramount above all others. ABOUT ROGER STONE I first met Roger Stone in 1975 soon after the National Conservative Political Action Committee (NCPAC) was created. Its chairman was Terry Dolan, a really nice guy who questioned the moral leadership of the conservative movement at the time. He was upset that republican Senator Jesse Helms of North Carolina was driving around Washington, D.C. in a convertible with a young blond woman at his side. Charles Black, a key leader in NCPAC, was from North Caroline and was a protégé of Senator Helms, a racist demagogue if there ever was one. Stone was another leader. Paul Manafort was on the scene but not prominent in the organization. I was the organization’s legal counsel. A short story will suffice in my finding out that Stone was a classic sociopath. On one occasion in 1975 Dolan, Stone and I had lunch together in the greater Washington area and had left the restaurant and were walking down the street. We noticed that on the opposite side of the street an elderly woman who suffered from severe curvature of the spine was walking with what appeared to be her two children, a man and a woman in their thirties. The poor woman’s agonizing bent over posture was such that her face was almost parallel with the sidewalk. When Stone saw her he immediately let out a yell of delight and began to walk and prance in the same way as the poor woman was doing. He did so while gesturing towards the trio on the other side of the street so as to attract their attention. I was so embarrassed and shocked at Stone’s gross behavior that I ran into a public garage in an attempt to distant myself from him. About twenty years ago I received a phone call from Fox commentator James Rosen (if my memory is correct) and who asked me what I thought of Stone. I told him about the above disturbing incident. Charles Black, Paul Manafort and Roger Stone went on to form the political lobbying firm of Black, Manafort and Stone and what they all had in common was being sociopaths. Their quest was for power, access and money and the thought of what was best for our country never entered the picture. In a sense I bear some responsibility for their rise to prominence. While an undergraduate at Georgetown University in 1958 I co-founded with a college friend, David Franke, the National Student Committee for the Loyalty Oath. We did this because there was no conservative movement in existence at the time and we thought we could start such a movement using college students. Senator Styles Bridges of New Hampshire brought us national exposure by endorsing our organization in a speech on the floor of the Senate. The following year, 1959, Franke and I founded Youth for Goldwater for Vice President, which was another major step toward building a conservative movement. Here is an account of what happened next from the book by Professor John A. Andrew III, The Other Side of the Sixties: Young Americans for Freedom and the Rise of Conservative Politics, (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1997), pp. 217-218: “William F. Buckley and Marvin Liebman met Douglas Caddy and David Franke, both of whom attended as representatives of Youth for Goldwater for Vice President. Together, these four men would turn their disappointment in Goldwater’s loss [at the 1960 GOP convention in Chicago that nominated Nixon] into a national conservative youth movement. Impressed by the passion of Caddy and Franke and their attempts to organize conservative youth in the past, including the creation of the Student Committee for the Loyalty Oath in 1958, Buckley and Liebman decided to mentor them. The loss of Goldwater for the Vice Presidential nomination convinced Buckley that young conservatives in the GOP needed to be fostered from the top down. He believed that young conservatives, with his guidance, could change the American political discourse. Consequently, Buckley hired Franke to intern at the National Review and Caddy worked for Liebman in public relations. Their first major task was to organize a national youth group for conservatives funded by Buckley. In September of 1960, on the Buckley family estate in Sharon, Connecticut, over 100 students from 44 different colleges and universities across the country assembled to devise a plan to capitalize on the growing conservatism of American youth and turn it into an organized political movement. The result created the Young Americans for Freedom, officially chartered on September 11, 1960, and the adoption of the Sharon Statement at the conference. In the Sharon statement, YAF articulated its critique of American society and proclaimed, ‘In this time of moral and political crisis, it is the responsibility of the youth of America to affirm certain eternal truths.’” https://www.slideshare.net/ClaireViall/rebels-with-a-causethe-growth-and-appeal-of-the-young-americans-for-freedom-in-the-1960s The founding of YAF in 1960 led to the birth of the modern conservative movement which occurred in the wake of a fantastically successful rally of conservatives at Manhattan Center in New York City in March 1961. So Black and Manafort and Stone, sad to say, are ethically challenged by-products of the modern conservative movement which decades ago was taken over by opportunists and sociopaths. Stone was active in successfully rigging three presidential elections: In Florida in 2000 for G. W. Bush, in Ohio in 2004 for G. W. Bush and in 2016 for Trump. He has utter contempt for honest elections. Rigging is what he does. Prior to the creation of NCPAC in 1975, Stone was active in the Nixon 1972 presidential campaign. http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/nbc-news-exclusive-memo-shows-watergate-prosecutors-had-evidence-nixon-n773581 I was the Original Attorney for the Watergate Seven but did not meet Stone until three years after the Watergate case broke. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/21500-memoir-on-being-original-attorney-for-the-watergate-seven-by-douglas-caddy/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jKBlJQNtek Liberals rejoiced with Nixon being forced to resign the presidency but the immediate result was the rise of the radical right with Black, Manafort and Stone being formed as a lobbying/PR firm and the extreme right-wing oligarch Joseph Coors founding the Heritage Foundation, headed by Edwin Feulner, and the Committee for a Free Congress, headed by Paul Weyrich I left Washington, D.C. in 1979 and moved to Texas once I recognized the bizarre and dangerous direction that the conservative movement was coming to embrace. Thus, it came as a surprise three decades later when in 2012 I was contacted by Roger Stone who requested that I supply him with any material in my possession on President Lyndon Johnson. This came about because I had been the attorney for Billie Sol Estes, LBJ’s silent business and political partner, in Billie Sol’s quest in 1984 to obtain a grant of immunity from prosecution from the U.S. Department of Justice in order that he could tell what he knew about LBJ crimes that took place before and during his presidency. Stone’s praise-worthy best-selling book, The Man Who Killed Kennedy: The Case Against LBJ, was published in 2013. https://www.amazon.com/Man-Who-Killed-Kennedy-Against/dp/1629144894/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1503279918&sr=8-1&keywords=the+man+who+killed+kennedy Stone’s book credits me as a primary source of information. For example, on page 214, he writes, “I did have access and the full cooperation of Billie Sol Estes’ personal attorney Douglas Caddy who supplied interviews, source materials and remembrances for this book.” http://home.earthlink.net/~sixthfloor/estes.htm It was because of my contribution of information in 2012 to Stone’s JFK book that when Schlanger asked me in January 2016 to arrange for him to meet Stone I was able to do so. SELECTED RELEVANT EMAILS I provided FBI Director Comey and Special Counsel Mueller with a large number of emails that accompanied my letters to them. Here are excerpts from a few of these: In an email of Feb. 20, 2016, Stone wrote me: “Thanks for connecting me with Harley Schlanger – he is a great guy and shares our goals. I think we hit it off. I have a back channel to Trump and we are fighting the globalists.” In email of May 5, 2016, Schlanger wrote me: “I have continued to work with Roger. He and I have done three radio interviews together, and I have set up several more for him, with my contacts. Obviously, he has played quite a brilliant role in the Trump campaign, outflanking completely the lead-footed GOP establishment. While I find some of what Trump says to be good, I’m still and not sure what a Trump presidency would mean.” In an email of July 25, 2016, to Schlanger, I wrote after the GOP presidential convention: “Well, you picked an exciting time in Germany to find a new home there. On the other hand, the U.S. as you can see from afar, is an exciting place, too, these days as both major parties are melting down. Neither candidate is worth a damn. “After watching Trump's acceptance speech, I realized what a dangerous and hypocritical man he is. He plans to turn domestic and foreign policy over to his VP Pence and spend his time making ‘America Great Again,’ which means acting out his narcissism on steroids. I have lost all respect for Roger Stone and realize my belief that he had changed from his sociopathic past was misplaced. “Roger and his business partner Paul Manafort will undergo minute media and governmental scrutiny in the coming weeks for their past political and business dealings. Manafort is increasingly linked to being a back door to Putin for the Trump campaign. The whole scandal will get radioactive if the Intelligence agencies produce evidence of a tie there.” FINAL THOUGHTS I have no regrets in writing Comey and Mueller even though I have been regularly harassed for so doing by private detectives employed by an unknown person of interest: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/24039-message-to-the-private-detectives-harassing-me/ I had a duty to do so because the on-going investigation is into felonious criminal activity. Here is the definition of Misprision of a Felony, which is applicable in my situation and governs my actions: 18 U.S. Code § 4 - Misprision of felony § 4. Misprision of felony Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 684; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(G), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.) I do not know whether my two letters will lead or have already led to an investigation by Special Counsel Mueller. Only time will tell. However, this entire venture will merit an interesting chapter in my forthcoming autobiography: https://www.amazon.com/Being-There-Eye-Witness-History/dp/1634241142/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1503340695&sr=1-1&keywords=Douglas+Caddy [End]
  7. I am pleased to report that Facebook today restored my ability to post on my home page. I attribute the restoration, which I trust is not just temporary, to my posting here yesterday in the forum of FB"s decision to deny my posting of this particular thread. Google and Bing regularly read what has been posted in the Education Forum and as a result my protest here yesterday likely quickly caught FB's attention. This leads me to wonder if we as forum members fully appreciate the exterior power of the forum that stems from what is posted in it..
  8. http://www.stcl.edu/home/state-of-texas-v-lee-harvey-oswald-nov-16-17-2017/
  9. I attempted today to post this topic and the link to it on Facebook but Facebook refused to allow me to do so. My attempt was at 7:-04 pm (central time) on Thursday, Oct. 19, 2017. I am officially recording what happened on Facebook here in the forum because the information in this topic that I have provided Special Counsel Mueller may appear subsequently in the criminal indictments that the Special Counsel will hand down in the not too distant future. As you may be aware Facebook is being investigated by the proper authorities for permitting Russia to post on Facebook fake ads and fake news that attacked Hillary and favored Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign. For months Facebook denied it allowed this to happen. But recently it was forced to admit publicly that it did allow Russia to place ads on Facebook and was paid in Russian rubles to do so. This aspect may be a factor in Facebook refusing today to allow me to post my link to this topic. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/19/us/politics/facebook-google-russia-meddling-disclosure.html
  10. In the near future new registration rates for attending the mock trial and/or Baldwin dinner may be posted. As soon as these are formally posted I shall inform the forum.
  11. The mystery of disgraced CIA spymaster James Angleton’s “retirement” After being publicly ousted as counterintelligence chief, Agency wasted little time in signing a contract with Angleton at his old salary Written by Emma Best https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2017/oct/19/angleton-return/
  12. LBJ -- the movie trailer

    https://teaser-trailer.com/movie/lbj/
  13. Ken Burns' Vietnam

    http://history-world.org/vietnam_war_statistics.htm
  14. 14 boxes of Jack Ruby records become public next week http://www.wfaa.com/features/14-boxes-of-jack-ruby-records-become-public-next-week/477719764
  15. The CMC-Permindex Papers

    The CMC-Permindex Papers https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/633054583714754579
  16. http://www.bizneworleans.com/October-2017/NOLA-Lee-Calls-On-The-Feds-To-Expose-Americas-Most-Controversial-Secret-On-JFKs-Assassination/
  17. Jefferson Morley wrote on Facebook today: I will soon go on my first book tour. It promises to be fun, if grueling. I will visit six cities in 21 days to talk about, sell, and sign THE GHOST, my compulsively readable story of James Angleton, one of the most brilliant and damaged spymasters to ever walk the corridors of the CIA. Angleton died 30 years ago but his story is more relevant than ever. If you want to know what people mean when talk about "the Deep State" (is it real? is it just a conspiracy theory?), you need to know Angleton's story. If I'm in your city, come on by, I tell you why, and I'll sign your book. Check out my Amazon page for dates and times.
  18. Judge Tunheim: “It’s time to release everything.” http://kfgo.com/news/articles/2017/oct/12/judge-who-chaired-jfk-records-review-board-says-its-time-to-release-everything/
  19. From the October 2017 issue of Harper's Magazine https://harpers.org/archive/2017/10/crime-and-punishment-4/
  20. Voices from the Shadows

    https://www.voicesfromtheshadows.com/
  21. Ken Burns' Vietnam

    David Talbot wrote on Facebook today: Thanks to Steve Wasserman and Judy Gumbo for this article by Christopher Koch, the first American reporter to visit North Vietnam during the war. The best article I've read on the PBS "Vietnam" series. The author nails it -- Burns & Novick demean the antiwar movement, thereby removing any moral center from the series, and they establish false equivalencies between the U.S. invaders and the Vietnamese who resisted them. No, the American and Vietnamese were NOT equally culpable. This kind of fuzzy narrative-- in which the United States is once again let off the hook and portrayed as a country whose good intentions simply took a tragic turn -- dooms us to keep repeating our horrific history. Steve Wasserman October 7 at 8:12am · Albany · My thanks to my longtime friend and comrade, Judy Gumbo, an original member of the Yippies, for alerting me to the following critique of the Burns-Novick Vietnam War series. Written by Christopher Koch who in 1965 became the first American reporter to visit North Vietnam, it is the most cogently argued and compelling of any of the criticisms made so far. The Tragic Failure of Ken Burns' Vietnam by Christopher Koch There is so much to love about this series. The uncompromising scenes of combat, the voices of both Americans and Vietnamese, the historical context, the exposure of the utter incompetence of our military leaders, the terrific music that is frequently exactly where it should be, the slowly revealed powerful still images and Peter Coyotes’ wonderful narrative voice. Its tragic failure is its inability to hold anyone responsible for their actions. Burns and Novick tell us that the war was begun “in good faith by decent people out of fateful misunderstandings, American overconfidence and …” whatever the current threat. That’s probably true of most wars. However, as we used to teach our children, you have to be accountable for your actions. If you kill someone speeding the wrong way down a one way street you’ll get charged with manslaughter even if you’re rushing someone to the hospital. It’s the lack of accountability, the failure to prosecute those who lied to get us into the war, who encouraged battlefield tactics that resulted in the massacre of women and children, who authorized the indiscriminate bombing of civilian targets, who drenched Vietnam in chemical poisons that will cause birth defects and death for generation. In order to maintain this central lie, Burns and Novick must establish a false balance between good and evil on both sides. Every time the United States is shown doing something bad, Burns and Novick show us how the Vietnamese also did bad things. In one absurd example, Coyote intones something like, “we called them ‘Dinks,’ ‘Gooks,’ ‘Mamasans;’ they called us ‘invaders’ and ‘imperialists.’” The GI terms are dehumanizing, but the Vietnamese terms are accurate. People who cross 3,000 miles of ocean to attack a country that has done them no harm, are accurately called ‘invaders.’ I suppose you could argue about the ‘imperialist’ charge. Vietnamese soldiers killed some 58,000 Americans and wounded a couple of hundred thousand more. Buns and Novick put the number of Vietnamese we killed at 3 million, but most experts say it was more like 4 million and Vietnam says it’s 6 million, with more people continuing to die from unexploded ordinance and Agent Orange. We destroyed 60% of their villages, sprayed 21 million gallons of lethal poisons, imposed free fire zones (a euphemism for genocide) on 75% of South Vietnam. They attacked US military bases in their country and never killed an American on American soil. There are no equivalences here. Burns and Novick do a good job of explaining that the United States worked with Ho Chi Minh during World War II and that Ho hoped to get our support after the war. They do not mention that having friendly relations with Communist countries was a successful strategy we used with Yugoslavia, because although it was Communist, Yugoslavia was also independent and a thorn in the Soviet Union’s side. Any minimal understanding of Vietnam’s history would have identified Vietnam’s fiercely independent streak. Intelligent leaders (anyone with half a brain) would have adopted the Yugoslav strategy in Vietnam. This brings us to another central problem of the Burns and Novick series, Leslie Gelb’s smiling recollection (he looks so smug) that nobody knew anything about Vietnam and didn’t for several years. In fact, throughout the series, many people say “we should have known better.” Is ignorance really a good excuse for launching a brutal war and the war crimes that followed? Unmentioned is how easy it was to gather information on Vietnam. French historians and journalists had studied every aspect of the country and its culture during and after their defeat in the French Indo China war. Much of this material had been translated into English. That’s how I figured out in 1965 that we were going to lose the war in Vietnam. Burns and Novick fail to mention my trip to North Vietnam in 1965 nor any of the other trips to North Vietnam by members of the American peace movement such as Tom Hayden, Staughton Lynd and Herbert Aptheker who went in January 1966 and members of Women’s Strike for Peace who went later. They only show us Jane Fonda’s trip in 1972, when she broadcast to US troops asking them to stop the bombing and was photographed sitting in an anti-aircraft gun. No one else who went to North Vietnam did either of these things. Our earlier trips to North Vietnam were important, because we were the only Americans to witness the destruction being rained down on North Vietnam. Burns’ documentary shows lots of aerial shots of bombs and napalm going off (Mussolini’s son called them rosebuds blooming in the desert when he attacked Ethiopia) but very few shots of the bomb’s effects on the ground in North Vietnam. We hear talk of precision bombing, but those of us who traveled to North Vietnam observed hospitals, schools, churches, markets, and working class neighborhoods utterly destroyed. And this was ten years before the war ended! The Burns’ documentary doesn’t show us the makeshift hospitals with children and old people without arms and legs or suffering from horrendous burns, all victims of American bombing attacks. The documentary focuses our compassion on the American pilots who dropped the bombs. In fact, the only heroes in Ken Burns’ Vietnam are American GI’s. Almost everyone else is their enemy: the Vietnamese they fought, the officers whose absurd strategy sent them to their deaths, and the American peace movement that struggled to end the war and bring them home. Burns and Novick portray the peace movement in the worst possible terms. In at least three places, they have moving sound bites about how returning soldiers were spit on or in other ways disrespected. It’s a false memory, at least in any general sense. They couldn’t find any visual support, no signs about baby killers, because it didn’t happen, or happened extremely rarely. To me, this is the central flaw of Burns and Novick’s film, their failure to deal truthfully and equally with the peace movement. Six million Americans took part in the anti-war effort (only 2.7 million Americans served as soldiers). Everyone I knew in the peace movement honored the veterans and wanted justice for them. They studied books, took part in teach-ins, and watched newsreels. But Burns and Novick, with a couple of notable exceptions, characterize the peace movement as uninformed, chaotic, disrespectful, self absorbed and violent. At one point, they intercut 1969 pictures of kids at Woodstock wallowing in great music with soldiers fighting in Vietnam. What was that supposed to mean? The kids who refused to go (many out of righteous opposition), who fled into exile in Canada or Sweden, or who, like boxer Muhammad Ali lost his right to fight for three years, or the Fort Hood 3 who went to prison, or the professors and journalists who lost their jobs, the protestors beaten by riled up construction workers, Martin Luther King who went public with his opposition in 1967, the priests who raided draft offices and burned their records, Alice Hertz and two other Americans who burned themselves to death in honor of the Buddhist monks who did the same in South Vietnam protesting our puppet regime — these are not worth profiling, all tinged by the same brush, they are the bad guys who disrespected our troops and went violent. What a wonderful authoritarian message that gives to viewers. Don’t protest an evil war or your country’s war crimes. The only heroes in Burns and Novick’s Vietnam are American servicemen and I am thrilled to see them finally recognized for what they went through. We have moving back stories of their homes, their motives for joining, their families waiting for them. None of the six million participants in the American peace movement gets similar treatment. The same is true, incidentally, of the Vietnamese. While the sound bites are great, there are no Vietnamese back stories either. Without the peace movement, there is no moral center to this series. The lack of accountability is fatal. That an American general can watch from a helicopter the massacre at Mai Lai (as the films tells us) and suffer no consequences is sickening. If military courts had aggressively prosecuted violators of human rights, or even if we only had held detailed and accurate reconciliations where the truth came out, there would have been a chance that our reckless invasions of Iraq with its policy of torture and the invasion of Afghanistan would not have followed so easily. When people are held accountable for their actions, perpetrators of questionable violent acts think twice. Last week on NPR an American general in Afghanistan announced that we are not trying to occupy territory in Afghanistan, we are simply trying to kill terrorists. Here, again, is the same rationale of the body count that led to disaster in Vietnam. We are reliving the Vietnam War because no one was ever really held responsible for its horrors. The moral center of the Vietnam War was held by those who opposed it. Several people I’ve talked to say the series is depressing. I had the same feeling of despair at the end. Burns and Novick suggest Vietnam’s a tragedy. It’s not. In tragedy a powerful human makes a terrible mistake and suffers the consequences. No one suffered any consequences for Vietnam. Burns and Novick assure us that even if people did wrong, they didn’t mean to. America is still the shining city on the hill and we can do no wrong.
  22. In 1967, the CIA Created the Label "Conspiracy Theorists" ... to Attack Anyone Who Challenges the "Official" Narrative http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-23/1967-he-cia-created-phrase-conspiracy-theorists-and-ways-attack-anyone-who-challenge
  23. The History Channel's program Ancient Aliens interviewed me for its Series 12, Episode 9 that aired on July 7, 2017. The title of the episode is "The Majestic Twelve." The only other participant in the show that I have met is Linda Moulton Howe for whom I have the highest regard and respect. I may also appear in episodes that are aired later. In this one I was asked what Howard Hunt told me as to why JFK was assassinated when Hunt and I had dinner in 1975 just before he entered prison to serve his sentence for Watergate. I recognize that there are some members of the forum who predictably will attack the program based on their past postings on the topic in the forum. No one has a monopoly on "the truth" and I certainly have never maintained that I do. My philosophy has always been to encourage the free exchange of ideas. http://www.history.com/shows/ancient-aliens
  24. The announcement was a disappointment to say the least. Here is one viewpoint on it: http://www.theangryufologist.us/tom-delonges-ufo-announcement-wasnt/
  25. Oliver Stone praises Michele Metta's new evidence on JFK Assassination https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rOF_1ZKOuc&feature=youtu.be
×