Jump to content
The Education Forum

Jeffrey Reilley

Members
  • Content count

    79
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Jeffrey Reilley

  • Rank
    Experienced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

802 profile views
  1. Mr. DiEugenio, I know this is off topic, but I will ask anyways, looking over Kissinger's timeline is it fair to say that he took over where Allen Dulles left off? I have always and will always believe that in 200 years, Dulles will be looked at as one of the worst villains in American History. Dulles was reaching his end as Kissinger was coming into his villainous prime. Where Dulles set the table in SE Asia and Latin America, Kissinger broke it down and washed the dishes. I could be way off, and am just curious. Thank you.
  2. Just a question, but do you think there is a big difference between anyone at that level of the game? It just seems to me that anyone able to reach the highest levels of government have been tainted so long that there really isn't that big of a difference in anyone. Clintons and the Trumps go to the same parties and seem cordial, but on television you'd think that they've had a blood feud for three generations.
  3. Jeffrey Reilley

    Carter: the POTUS nearest to JFK?

    3 bullets left on a windowsill overlooking where Carter was giving that speech, if I recall correctly.
  4. Jeffrey Reilley

    Bernard Wilds' website of rare JFK research PDFs

    I've been reading this non-stop since I saw this
  5. Jeffrey Reilley

    Bernard Wilds' website of rare JFK research PDFs

    Thank you so much for sharing!!!
  6. Jeffrey Reilley

    New document releases 2017

    Just an "as I go" comment on this reading: I find it interesting that Chief of Station, I think Devlin(off memory) had heard nothing about assassinating Lumumba in late July of 60'. Lumumba was assassinated what, 3 days before Kennedy's inauguration? So, I take that as the ones giving orders were banking on Nixon winning, and when Kennedy started to pull away, panic mode was instilled. They realized that the status quo may have been in jeopardy
  7. Jeffrey Reilley

    Jack Ruby Monologue--the beginning

    This reminds me of the scene in Goonies, when Chunk is being questioned by the antagonists. Just talking, talking, talking...
  8. Jeffrey Reilley

    THE KENNEDY CULT BLINKERS THIS INVESTIGATION

    Mr. Santos, First off, great post. Second, when and where do you give lectures? I would gladly attend. Thirdly, I have never heard this. Please enlighten. I will pay if I must.
  9. Jeffrey Reilley

    George W. Anderson

    Not sure if this will help, but I am intrigued and reading currently. Try to find some other relevant stuff as well.
  10. Jeffrey Reilley

    How did the conspiracy to kill JFK start?

    I don't understand this statement. Not saying I disagree at all, but why kill him if he hadn't ascended to power? I'm of the belief that if Nixon had won, the good ole' boys would have been running the show, they would have had the chance to have their own little war in Cuba, and the status quo would have gone on undeterred. I believe once Kennedy won the election, the truly powerful people of the country went into a sort of "panic mode" and did everything they could to undermine or sabotage his presidency. When everything failed and it looked like Kennedy was going to win again the next year, "panic mode" went into desperation, which leads to hastily made assassination.
  11. Jeffrey Reilley

    Ted Kennedy

    I forgot all about. Good call.
  12. Jeffrey Reilley

    Ted Kennedy

    If my two brothers were assassinated the way they were and at the times they were, and then Chappaquiddick happened to me, two things would happen in my mind: 1. Any doubt I may have had about my brothers' murders would be gone. 2. I would worry about myself and the rest of my family and would never speak of it again.
  13. Jeffrey Reilley

    Lee Bowers Accident

    4th paragraph, "To me, he is a sensationalist". About sums everything up right there. I hate that language being used when discrediting anything. To me, it sounds like mere opinion."To me, Geraldo Rivera is a sensationalist. His staff does not take time to confirm witnesses' stories. His research consultants' veracity is usually unquestioned. The search for documentation is superficial. Opinions pass as facts." I didn't go with the exact quote before, sorry. But I really cannot stand when people do that. "
  14. I like this post. Thank you. I've always believed it had to be people that were: A: Experienced- Nobody could have just lucked into such a successful operation as their first attempt, nor would any person capable of pulling off such a feat be willing to swing so big on their first attempt. B: Capable- Someone with the ability to get others to go along with the "plan". Not getting people directly involved, but to stand-down at the least...i.e. Hoover, JCS, Warren Commission. A person(s) capable of convincing others that there was no other way. Whether it be because of a possible WWIII scenario or an end to proper democracy because of some weird liberal takeover, the person(s) had to have the ability to reach those in power and convince those in power to either lend a hand or at the least turn a blind eye. C: Willing- The person(s) had to be willing to deal with the consequences. Whether it be a land war with Cuba where a few thousand Americans and a percentage of the population of Cuba died, or reversing Kennedy's withdrawal plan in Southeast Asia and dealing with the fact that thousands of Americans would die and...what, a couple million Vietnamese deaths would ensue, the person(s) had to be willing to let this happen. D: Arrogant- The person(s) had to believe they would not be challenged, caught, or punished. The person(s) had to believe they were the smartest in the room at any given time. Good lawd, they were taking down POTUS, for cryin' out loud. That in and of itself screams arrogance...or desperation. Who had experience taking down governments? Dulles oversaw the overthrow of Guatemala, right? Others involved in that endeavor were Phillips, Hunt, Shackley, and so on...Why did they do it? Commies running loose through the streets having wild orgies and burning American flags? Or was it some rich old cronies not happy about a new leader trying to add prosperity to impoverished people? How were they so successful? Manipulation of the air waves, and making the people believe they were about to be overrun...controlling the media. Who were in charge of that aspect, Hunt and Shackley(I think). Dulles was retired after BOP, but Hunt was busy helping him with his memoir, if memory serves correct, in 1963. Phillips was apparently setting Oswald up for patsy time and in Mexico City, and Shackley was running JMWAVE. As well, Shackley was very close to Mr. Harvey, who I wouldn't put it past to use an Italian rifle as a little signature on his part. Phillips went on to whack the Chilean guy, Shackley decided the heroin business and mass killings in Southeast Asia were his thing, Dulles decided to get real old, but not before being a part of the Warren Commission, and Hunt, once he became a malcontent was put in prison and his wife was in a well timed aircraft accident. KGB, no matter what.
×