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

Mark Gorton

Members
  • Content count

    72
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Mark Gorton

  • Rank
    Experienced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

4,670 profile views
  1. I just finished watching "JFK to 911 Everything is a Rich Man's Trick" a fairly new film by Francis Richard Conolly. This 3.5 hour film is available on Youtube. Overall, this is the best overview of the JFK assassination that I have seen. The film covers everything from the historical underpinnings of the assassination to the details of the shooting and the following coverup. The film is great in many ways. I found the general overview to be mostly accurate and nicely presented. The summary of the shooting in Dealey Plaza was really great. I didn't agree with every detail of what was presented, but overall it was right on. I also found his presentation of the idea that Officer Tippet's dead body was used as part of the autopsy cover-up to be reasonably compelling. I liked so much about this film that I found the use of unnecessary hyperbole saddening. Rockefeller wasn't just extraordinarily rich, he was "the richest man who ever lived". JFK was not just a great politician, but "the greatest politician in the history of the world", etc. A viewer can easily see through these misstatements, but it got a bit confusing when he was discussing the role of the Skull and Bones network in funding Hitler's rise to power. Was he just overstating or was he confused? He also gets a bunch of small facts wrong. Given the amount of material presented in this film, it is not too much, but given how much I would like to have a film like this that I could recommend without reservation, these small mistakes are bothersome. He also has a tendency to use the world Nazi when he means fascist. And he calls people "evil". He does such a good job showing the horrible actions of many men that these statements are unnecessary and take away from the very strong points he is making. The last 5 minutes of the film are the worst. He loses it a bit at the end. But I don't want to dwell on the bad points, overall, I would say that this film a very well worth watching for anyone interested in the Coup of '63. Francis Conolly does a really nice job presenting the material. His understanding of the Coup of '63 is profound, and his use of clips from old movies really helps him illustrate a lot of points. It would not take too much for Francis Conolly to go back and fix the mistakes in his film. For example, his misidentifies the Browns of Brown and Root as being the Browns of Brown Brothers Harriman. I hope that members of this forum can help fact check this film and put in their comments in this thread so that Mr. Conolly can fix these small mistakes in another release.
  2. From Al Martin's "The Conspirators: Secrets of an Iran-Contra Insider", page 8: "From 1987 to 1991, I cooperated with every Democrat investigating committee in Washington investigating Iran-Contra and later investigating Iraqgate, BCCI, BNL, etc. from the early stages of the Kerry Commission hearings in 1987 to the Tower Commission, the Hughes Commission and the Alexander Commission. .... Of the 1,300 witnesses, subpoenaed, deposed, interrogated before these committees, 413 have since died under clouded circumstances." And on page 17: "(When Bill Casey headed the Agency, he would remark privately that his sense of honor was such that 'American police officers should not be liquidated unless absolutely necessary.') Regarding Operation Sledgehamemer -- all those who ever attempted to publicly disseminate any genuine documents or information have now been liquidated, some 36 people in all. (Paul) Wilcher, by the way, was murdered by a guy named Eddy Castille, who is employed by Department 4 (Domestic Wet Operations, or DWO) of the Agency. He is one of their shooters. Castille inspires so much fear within the community that the very mention of his name in context of what he does has proven to be a death sentance -- or at least a sentence of substantial pressure, harassment and intimidation. The well known Iran Contra attorney in Texas, Dave Parker, is a notable example of what happens to people who ever mention Castille's name. Former Army CID investigator Bill McCoy told Parker to keep his mouth shut when Parker was disseminating information about his guy. After Parker's office was bombed, after his house burned down, after his car was blown up and after he was beaten up three or four times -- he got the message."
  3. David Karr

    I have recently finished reading "Nemesis: Aristotle Onassis, Jackie O, and the Love Triangle that Brought Down the Kennedys." Nemesis is a great book and an absolute must read for anyone interested in RFK's assassination. Peter Evans is a great writer and a great researcher. He conducted a huge number of interviews to produce the book. Nemesis is both very readable and very well researched. Peter Evans lays out a compelling case that Aristotle Onassis was involved in the plot to kill RFK. Onassis himself confessed to financing RFK's assassination. The first part of the book is background on Onassis, his hatred for Bobby Kennedy, and a whole bunch of Kennedys screwing around in almost every possible combination. However, the meat of the book starts in chapter 18 and continues for most of the rest of the book. This is the case that Onassis financed the RFK assassination. RFK's assassination is not nearly as well understood as JFK's assassination. In the past, I have done a bit of reading and researching RFK's assassination, so I understand the widely known aspects of the plot. I had assumed that most of the information about RFK's assassination had been lost to the sands of time, so I was surprised that Evans was able to discover such a large chunk. Onassis is brought into the plot to kill RFK by David Karr. I have tried to do what internet research I could on David Karr, but I get very little. Karr was clearly a spook of some sort, and he had ties to the Russians. But beyond that, not too much is clear to me. Karr is the one who connects Onassis with Mahmoud Hamshari. Onassis agrees to fund Hamshari, and Hamshari goes to LA does some stuff and meets William Joseph Bryan. Hamshari is a Palestinian who has high level connections with the PLO. It seems that Hamshari was involved in the organizational effort that led to Sirhan Sirhan confronting RFK. Of all the people mentioned in Nemesis, David Karr is the one the highest up the organizational chart of the RFK assassination. It is Karr who recruits Onassis into the plot. Karr is the one who puts Hamshari in touch with William Joseph Bryan. And Karr is the one who meets with Lyndon Johnson on April 3rd, 1968. From Nemesis page 170: "But shortly after Karr's visit to the Oval Office, Eugene McCarthy saw Johnson, and when he brought up the subject of Bobby's presidential run, 'The president said nothing: instead he drew a finger across his throat, silently, in a slitting motion.'" Peter Evans sticks to laying out the facts, and he does not speculate much about what can be surmised from these facts. Evans also may not have fully comprehended the breadth of the plot to kill RFK. Evans justifiably focuses on Onassis' role in the plot. But given the information that Evans provides, it may be possible to extrapolate some more from what he writes. It seems that just as the plot to kill JFK was designed to point at the Cubans and Russians, the plot to kill RFK was designed to point to the PLO, Onassis and maybe through Karr, the Russians. The plot to kill RFK was masterful in its level of nuance and indirection. If people pulled on the Sirhan Sirhan thread, they would have gotten to the PLO, and if they followed the money, they would have gotten to Onassis. Whoever designed the ultimate plot to kill RFK was able to use Onassis' hatred for Bobby and his desire to get Bobby out of the way so Onassis could marry Jackie to set up Onassis as a patsy. I doubt Onassis understood what he was signing up for until it was too late. And if anyone follows Onassis up the chain, they get to David Karr who is so murky and connected to the Russians that even sophisticated observers would have had to wonder who was really behind the assassination. The reasons that I do not think that Karr or Onassis are the ultimate sponsor of the plot to kill RFK is that neither of them had access to MKULTRA assassins, and neither of them had access to the mechanisms to control the local investigation into RFK's assassination. Whoever was the ultimate sponsor needed control of these pieces. And we see through David Morales' connection to the LAPD investigation that there are CIA ties there. Hamshari was a radical Palestinian, however, he was so extreme in his suggestions that the PLO kill a high profile American on American soil that the Palestinian hard liners thought he was crazy. After his suggestion for a high level assassination in the US is rejected by the PLO leadership, Hamshari goes ahead and engages in this plot anyway. When the news came out that a Palestinian had killed RFK, the PLO leadership thought that this news was about the worst thing that could happen to them. So Hamshari's actions are actually those of someone who was acting to hurt the PLO. A few years later, the PLO leadership found out something about Hamshari or something about what Hamshari did that led the PLO to have Hamshari killed. So it is possible that Hamshari was an agent of someone outside of the Palestinian world. The most likely candidate for an organization to have penetrated the PLO at the highest levels would be Mosad. I have no evidence to back this up, but it seems less likely that the CIA or some other intelligence service would have these sorts of connections in Israel/Palestine. If this speculation is true (and perhaps there are old Mosad people alive today who could shed some light on this), then it is possible that LBJ through Mosad organized this leg of the RFK assassination. We know that LBJ had an incredibly close working relationship with the Israeli leadership. Please read more on Operation Chaos and the false flag attack on the USS Liberty to get an idea about the sorts of things LBJ was doing with the Israelis. Also keep in mind that LBJ handed Israel its nuclear arsenal. The possibility of an LBJ/Israeli nexus is very strong. It is worth me stating that my conviction that the ultimate planners of RFK's assassination were the cabal who killed JFK. This cabal absolutely could not allow Bobby Kennedy to become president. They had to kill him, and many people warned Bobby of this. This is part of the reason that I find Karr's meeting with LBJ so important. This meeting is a direct connection between the mastermind of JFK's assassination and the highest level person we know to be involved in RFK's assassination. For someone with a huge amount of time and energy, I suspect that important new information can still be learned about David Karr.
  4. Another Nineteen

    I recently finished reading "Another Nineteen: Investigating Legitimate 9/11 Suspects", by Kevin Ryan. I would now rate "Another Nineteen" as the best book I have yet read on the topic of 9/11. "Another Nineteen" is a very, very well researched book. Kevin Ryan must have spent a good part of the last decade reading, researching and organizing the information in this book. The book itself is hard to summarize because in many ways it is a summary of a huge amount of information. Kevin Ryan's understanding of the 9/11 op and the fake war on terror are profound. He uses the framing of investigating suspects to provide data and information that in many cases makes a very strong case for a deep and wide government conspiracy behind 9/11. "Another Nineteen" is not the ideal book for people unfamiliar with organized government corruption. It is not a book for beginners. But for anyone interested in deep politics and the way our country really runs, this is a fantastic book. Just as it is impossible to have a good understanding of the American political system in the 1960's and 1970's without understand the JFK assassination, similarly, the scope and size of the 9/11 op shows the current reach of the criminal cabal that running a good fraction of the US government. Although prior to reading "Another Nineteen", I had already been thoroughly convinced that 9/11 was a false flag attack; "Another Nineteen" has showed me that the 9/11 op was even bigger than I thought. It is amazing that the group of guys responsible for the high level planning of 9/11 had all been working together since the Ford administration (Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc.). Kevin Ryan does a great job of showing evidence of involvement in the planning and facilitation of the 9/11 attacks within the FBI, CIA, FAA and NORAD. The evidence that Ryan presents is really overwhelming. Kevin Ryan uses the framing of presenting information about suspects. This framing allows him to make some strong statements without overreaching. The only part of the book that I found a bit of a reach was the inference that Rudy Guiliani and Bernard Kerik were involved in facilitating the 9/11 attacks. The evidence he presents on these points is not as strong as the rest of the book, and I don't see a reason that they would need to have been involved in the run up to the attacks. However, Kevin Ryan's instincts on other matters are so strong, I am reluctant to dismiss his thoughts on these points. Kevin Ryan frequently uses the analysis of who benefited from the 9/11 attacks to guide his investigation, and Bernard Kerik was appointed by Bush to be head of the Dept of Homeland Security. That appointment all be itself should make anyone skeptical of Kerik, but I have not seen enough other evidence to convince me that Kerik was more than another criminal scumbag with whom Bush was able to work. Most of the information in the book is presented as evidence to be considered, so that Ryan is able to imply a lot of things without stating for sure that these things are true. Given that we are dealing with deep state crimes that are not easy to document, this framing does Ryan well. Over time, we will see more information become available that buttresses most of Ryan's points. One thing that Ryan states as a true fact is that WTC7 was brought down by a controlled explosion. Previously, I had dismissed claims that WTC7 was a planned demolition. However, Ryan's work in the rest of "Another Nineteen" was so strong that I have now started reading up on the WTC7 collapse, and even though the evidence is thin, I am now inclined to believe Ryan on this point too. If nothing else, there is evidence that the investigation into the collapse of the WTC on 9/11 was a cover-up operation. The existence of a cover up seems to imply that there is something to cover-up. Ryan does a great job of showing how the war on terror has been manufactured by the US government and its allies. He traces the linkages between Operation Gladio up to today. He also highlights organizations like Cercle Inay and the Safari Club that involved many of the same people that later helped fund and organize the terror threat that replaced communism as the boggy man that could be used to motivate peaceful people into a state of perpetual war. I had known the broad outlines of much of what is in this book. But Ryan traces the specific people, plans and organizations that led up to the 9/11 attacks. I had heard of things like the Continuity of Government program, but I had no idea how key it was in the planning of the deep state. And there is much, much more in this book. It is a must read for anyone who wants a good understanding of how the deep state currently functions in the US and how the 9/11 attacks were carried out.
  5. From the blurb on the back of "Intelligence Matters": "Intelligence Matters also make a meticulous and at times starling case for official Saudi Arabian complicity in the 9/11 plots". But of course the Saudis would not have done this by themselves. And once you follow that thread, you get to a plot that involves so much high level US participation that it needs to be covered up. In my opinion, the Saudis are maybe only 10% of the whole story.
  6. Porter Goss was co-chair of the "Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities before and after the Terrorist Attacks of 9/11". He co-chaired with Senator Bob Graham. This inquiry failed to calm requests for a more honest accounting of 9/11, and the 9/11 Commission was later created. Senator Bob Graham was so unhappy about his experiences with the joint inquiry that in 2008 he published a book, "Intelligence Matters, The CIA, The FBI, Saudi Arabia, and the Failure of America's War on Terror." In "Intelligence Matters" Graham tells the story of how the Bush white house sabotaged their attempts to get at the truth. When Bob Graham tried to pursue leads linking the Saudi Govt to 9/11, Dick Cheney threatened him prosecution under the Patriot Act if he did not back down.
  7. Robert, I have to disagree with you about 9/11. I believe, and I believe it can be proven that 9/11 was a false flag attack. Given your deep knowledge of how the national security state works, if you do a bit of reading, it should be fairly easy for you to understand the 9/11 op. I have only come to think about 9/11 in the last year or so, and given that is it much more recent and less well researched than the Coup of '63, the 9/11 op is less well fleshed out than the JFK assassination, but still, there is more than enough evidence at this point to clearly prove that 9/11 was a black op. Since your understanding of the Coup of '63 is so profound, here are a couple of thoughts that may trigger your interest. If 9/11 was just a straightforward terrorist attack, why would Porter Goss, a member of operation 40, along with Felix Rodriquez and Barry Seal be put in charge of the 9/11 investigation. Here is a guy who worked with Ted Shackley, Ed Landsdale, Bill Harvey and David Morales. It is almost the equivalent of putting Allen Dulles in charge of the Warren Commission. He is a direct connection between the Coup of '63 and 9/11. This fact all by itself should make you very, very suspicious. And then both official 9/11 investigations have been shown to be cover up jobs. Well what could necessitate a national security state cover up? Here are a few books that are worth reading on the topic of 9/11: My new number one book on the topic is "Another Nineteen" by Kevin Ryan. Even if you don't care about 9/11, you will like this book. It does a great job analyzing the players in the deep state in the last few decades. It traces a lot of these people back to the Ford administration. Chenney, Rumsfeld, GHW Bush have all been working together since the early 70's. You know what this gang is capable of. "Another Nineteen" is super well researched and very well footnoted. Kevin Ryan has done an impressive job pulling together info from a huge number of sources. A much quicker, easier read in "False Flag 911" by Philip Marshall. Philip Marshall paid for this book with his life. There is perhaps no higher compliment than to have your work be so true and so dangerous that the cabal feels required to kill you. And "Disconnecting the Dots", by Kevin Fenton is also very good. This book is probably a bit dense for most people, but I think you might like it. It is meticulous in how it extracts info from the official 9/11 reports and sources. I would analogize it to John Newman's work on Lee Harvey Oswald. The direct linkage between the Coup of '63 and 9/11 makes the work you are doing to expose the truth about the JFK assassination much more relevant today. It takes the Coup of '63 from history to (almost) current events, and once one sees that 9/11 was a black op, then it is not hard to see how the cabal behind these events is still operative today. Best Regards, Mark
  8. David, If you are interested in recent FBI history. I highly recommend chapter 4, "Louis Freeh and the FBI" in Kevin Ryan's recent book "Another Nineteen: Investigating Legitimate 9/11 Suspects". The whole book is very, very well researched and footnoted. Kevin Ryan has pulled together information from a wide variety of sources. The chapter on the FBI does a nice job of highlighting the systematic failures within the FBI to stop terrorism before and during Freeh's tenure. I just finished reading "Another Nineteen", and I now consider it to be the best book written to date on the black op we know as 9/11. Kevin Ryan's understanding of deep politics and the deep state is as good as any I have read. I highly recommend this book for anyone interested in the recent functioning of the deep state, even if they are not particularly interested in 9/11. Ryan does an amazing job tracking the careers and networks of Cheney, Rumsfeld, Carlucci, Armitage, Freeh, Tenet, Clark, and a host of others. I can only imagine how much time went into compiling the information in this book. I learned more about Dick Cheney in 10 pages of this book than I had in 400 pages of previous reading I had done. I also recommend (although not as highly), "The Terror Factory: Inside the FBI's Manufactured War on Terrorism", by Trevor Aaronson. The title of the book says what it is about, and the book is mostly about the low level implementation of a fake war on terror. But none the less, it is well worth reading. After reading how the FBI is so desperate to find terrorists that they create their own, it makes their "oops we missed the Boston bombers" story hard to believe. And David thanks for asking for book recommendations about the recent FBI. Given the recent horrible cover-ups perpetrated by the FBI, I have been looking into the same topic myself. And thanks Larry, I will get the book you recommended.
  9. Raymond, Although I don't think that J. Edgar Hoover was actively involved in the planning of the shooting part of JFK's assassination, I am quite convinced that he had knowledge of the plot beforehand and was actively involved in plot. Hoover's and the FBI's role in the plot had two big parts, first suppressing pre-assassination warnings about the plot and secondly, running a good fraction of the cover up. I have read of a few examples of the FBI failing to follow up on pre-assassination threats to the life of JFK. I wish I could cite these off the top of my head, but I read things and then I can't remember where I read them. I think some of this is in "JFK and the Unspeakable". But I am sure that bits of this are in a bunch of places. It is absolutely clear that the FBI orchestrated a good fraction of the initial cover up of the killings. Part of what convinces me that Hoover was in on the plot is the speed with which the FBI swooped in a began covering up the coup. If Hoover had been caught off guard, it is hard to see how the FBI would have been able to push the cover up as quickly as it did. I can see that Hoover would have been happy to pin the killings on a commie, but that would not explain why the FBI would have been actively working to cover up the plot. If Oswald was a legit commie killer, a straight forward investigation would have sufficed. As it turned out, Oswald had been on the FBI payroll. And this information came out not long after the assassination. Having Oswald on the FBI payroll could have motivated Hoover to want to cover up the truth behind the assassination because he did not want to be embarrassed by having someone associated with his organization kill the president. However, I believe that Oswald's FBI connections were part of the plot. It served the purposed of giving Hoover a cover story for covering up the truth behind the assassination. That way if it became a public scandal that the FBI had covered up the truth about the president's assassination, Hoover had a plausible excuse for the FBI cover up which was less unpleasant than being complicit in the coup d'etat. This use of Oswald is another layer in a really beautifully crafted plot. The designers of the coup had nuances and contingencies planned for so many situations embedded into the fabric of the plot. However, the FBI being trapped into an accidental cover-up does not mesh with several facts. Again, the multiple failures to pursue credible threats to the life of the president, and also the speed with which the FBI was working on a full cover up. The FBI is a big bureaucratic organization. If they were innocent, the FBI would have been stunned and dazed at first, but the FBI was moving with full force from moment one after the shootings to cover up the assassination. LBJ and Hoover were extremely close. It would have been very easy for LBJ to bring Hoover into any plot. Hoover hated RFK and JFK. Hoover had enough dirty laundry of his own that retirement (which was on autopilot under JFK) was a real danger to him. And since Hoover was not actively involved in the shooting part of the assassination, he was not taking very much of risk by being involved. Very little was left to chance in the Coup of '63. The Dallas police were actively involved. The military took care of the autopsy. The FBI ran the cover up. The stakes were too high for too many people for the coup plotters to not have the FBI on board beforehand. The plotters had to worry about RFK and probably a handful of JFK loyalists, but Hoover was well entrenched in the cabal that killed JFK.
  10. I have just finished reading Enemies: A History of the FBI, by Tim Weiner. Overall, I found it to be a mediocre book; a sanitized version of the history of the FBI. The best part of the book is the part that covers the formation of the FBI and the very early days of the FBI. The closer the book gets to the present day, the weaker it gets. Weiner did have access to some recently released papers from Hoover that provide an interesting insight into the early days of the FBI. One interesting thing I did learn from the book was the mutual hatred and rivalry between J. Edgar Hoover and Allen Dulles. From Enemies pages 188-189, "Hoover had made plainly evident his personal and professional contempt for the CIA's chief, Allen Dulles. He deigned to meet with Dulles no more than a half dozen times during the eight years of Eisenhower's presidency. He made sure that his aides reflected his thinking. 'How in the world can I do business with the Bureau?' Dulles had shouted at his FBI liaison in an unguarded moment. 'I try and you keep striking back.'" Enemies goes on to tell how Hoover felt that the FBI was the rightful head of US intelligence, and he resented the CIA from the start. At the FBI, Hoover had a standing non-cooperation order with the CIA. The reason I find this interesting in the context of the Coup of '63 has to do with my estimate of the internal hierarchy of the cabal behind the coup. I am of the opinion that LBJ is the prime mover in the coup, and I would rank Allen Dulles as being the second most important person in the coup. I know other people feel that the Dulles/CIA aspects of the coup are stronger than the LBJ/texan side of things. Certainly, LBJ, Hoover and Dulles were all important players in the Coup of '63. But given the animosity between Hoover and Dulles, it seems unlikely that Dulles could have easily brought Hoover into the coup. But LBJ was extremely close to Hoover, and he was well placed to involve Hoover in the coup. A model of the cabal hierarchy with LBJ at the top and both Dulles and Hoover connected to LBJ meshes with the above facts, but Dulles as the lynch-pin of the cabal conflicts with the above facts, so I consider the animosity between Hoover and Dulles to be another supporting piece of evidence for the primacy of LBJ as the prime mover of the coup.
  11. 9/11 conspiracy summary table

    Sorry about the poor image quality. I could not make tables work in the editor, so I used an image file. But I could not get the editor to show a high res version of the image. Please see the attached pdf to read a high quality version of the table. If anyone knows how to make this post look nicer, I would appreciate the help.
  12. The 9/11 attacks were a false flag attack (where an attack is made to seem to be from someone other than the real perpetrator) led by the Bush family, Dick Cheney and the Saudis. Osama Bin Laden did not plan or orchestrate the 9/11 attacks. They were most likely conceived by GHW Bush and his inner circle. The planning, training and coordination of the hijackers is done by the Saudi royal family, Saudi intelligence and companies closely related to Saudi intelligence. Anti-terror defenses in the US are systematically disabled by members of the Cabal placed within the anti-terror operations of the CIA (Alec Station.) Honest investigator John O'Neill of the FBI is prevented from doing his job by a bogus internal investigation that centered on a briefcase he had misplaced for a few hours. Connections between high level Saudi officials and the hijackers are suppressed by Dick Cheney and the Bush administration. The 9/11 Commission is rigged to produce a false report. Torture is used to extract false confessions from al Qaeda members who did not plan the operation. The motive for the attacks is to allow for a pretext for the Iraq war and the large scale profiteering opportunity provided by such a war. 23 things you might not know about 9/11: The hijackers likely received pilot training and practice on real 757 and 767's from the Saudi Intelligence linked company Dallah Avco. Dallah Avco employee Omar Bayouni provided housing and support for three hijackers. Prince Bandar Bin Sultan's (Bandar Bush) wife funded some of the hijackers through cashiers checks. Prince Bandar had helped fund George HW Bush's illegal Iran-Contra operation back in the 1980's. Prince Bandar was so close to the Bush family that the Bush family nicknamed him Bandar Bush. When Senator Bob Graham tried to pursue an investigation of the Saudi connection to the hijackers, Dick Cheney threatened him with a criminal probe for “leaking classified information” if he did not back off. Saudi pilot hijacker Hani Hanjour had lived in the town of Marana, AZ near the secluded desert facility of Pinal Airpark. At the same time, Blackwater was one of several operators who used Pinal Airpark to train covert flight crews. Many of the hijackers were deliberately allowed to circumvent the terrorist watch list with aid of certain elements of the CIA. The seeds of the Islamic US based terrorism are planted in the US by the CIA. Between Jan 20 – Sept 10, 2001, President Bush briefed on Al-Qaeda over 40 Times. However, the intelligence briefings on Bin Laden are unable to cite a single verifiable source of information linking Bin Laden to the planning of the attacks. The only evidence against Khalid Sheikh Mohammad (KSM) the supposed mastermind of the 9/11 attacks was his own confession extracted after 2 years of torture. President Bush was briefed by Condoleezza Rice about the suicide attack on the WTC at 8:55 AM. Then without activating any air defenses, he proceeded to join the 2nd grade class. The Ghazzawi family, a Saudi family with links to powerful Saudi prince Sultan bin Salman bin Abdul Aziz Al-Saud, provided assistance to hijackers in Sarasota, Florida. A hit squad has been killing people in order to hide the nasty truth behind 9/11. Certain FBI operational units were used in both the 9/11 plot and the Paul Wellstone assassination. Within 6 hours of the 9/11 attacks, Cheney is already working to implement the Patriot Act and roll back the rights of Americans. From 1993 – 2000, Marvin Bush was a principal in a company call Securacom that provided security for the WTC, United Airlines and Dulles Airport. On Sept 29th, 2002, Marvin Bush's 62 year old nanny, Bertha Champage, is driven over by her own car at Marvin Bush's house. 9/11 commission is a complete cover up., 3 of the 4 people who oversaw 9/11 commissions wrote books complaining about the cover up. In Sept 2000, the neoconservative think tank Project for the New American Century whose members include Cheney, Jeb Bush, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Scooter Libby produces a report with plans for the US to take military control of the Gulf. However, PNAC complains that the political will for these plans may be lacking, “absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor. John O'Neill, the FBI's best Al-Qaeda expert, is harassed by a pointless investigation into a briefcase with classified information that he misplaced for a couple of hours over a year prior. The briefcase was locked and never touched. This investigation prevents him from stopping Al-Qaeda and forces him into retirement. Insiders with prior knowledge of the attacks was able to profit in the financial markets. Huge number of put options on the stocks of American and United Airlines were purchased between Sept 6th and Sept 10th, 2001. However, when investigators tried to look into this insider trading, these investigations were not permitted to move forward and “all are treating these inquiries as if they were state secrets.” 9/11 was a false flag attack whose purpose was to create a pretext for the war on terror. The ultimate perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks were the Bush Family, Cheney and the Saudis.
  13. Paul, It looks like he is trying to pin it on Castro: http://jfkfacts.org/assassination/news/at-the-newseum-epsteins-unconvincing-indictment-of-the-pro-castro-assassin/ Best, Mark
  14. Since the time I started this thread, my thinking about Ed Epstein has evolved. I am now of the opinion that Ed Epstein is a knowing agent of disinformation. When I first met Ed, I knew very little about him or his background. At that time, I knew that he had written on the topic of the JFK assassination, but that was about all I knew. When we had dinner, I was somewhat puzzled by Ed's seeming lack of interest in the JFK assassination. He came across as someone who had not paid much attention to the assassination in the past 20 or 30 years. Although he said that he thought the CIA was behind the assassination, he seemed unable to elaborate on why he thought that or who at the CIA was involved. At the time, I wrote off his lack of interest and clear thinking as a product of someone who was not familiar with some of the information which came out in the last few decades, and I also assumed that his high degree of contact with James Angleton had confused him. I have another friend to whom I have explained my views about the Coup of ’63. As a weird coincidence, she also knows Ed Epstein. She sees him a bit socially, and she told me that Ed was writing a book about the Cuban angle for the assassination. Based on my conversations with this friend, she kind of knows that LBJ was behind the assassination, so she asked Ed if he thought that LBJ was behind the assassination, and Ed said, “yes”. I then later found out that Ed had been speaking publicly about the JFK assassination being a pro-Castro operation: http://jfkfacts.org/assassination/news/at-the-newseum-epsteins-unconvincing-indictment-of-the-pro-castro-assassin/#comments His comments about Oswald being in league with Castro were completely contradictory with what he told me and also my other friend. In addition, the fact that he is actively talking and thinking about the JFK assassination discredits my previous benign assumption about him being uninterested and out of date with the JFK assassination, so the only explanation that properly accounts for all of these facts is that Ed is a knowing agent of disinformation. Ed being a knowing agent of disinformation would also be consistent with his false attacks on Terry Reed when Compromised was released. (See Defrauding America p 431-432 for this tidibit.) And some of the other posts on this thread also point out a series of other actions taken by Ed over the years that have served the purpose of spreading misinformation.
×