Jump to content
The Education Forum
Vince Palamara

Bush not in Dallas- He is dead

Recommended Posts

Wasn't his daddy Prescott central to the plot to depose FDR, the one that Smedley Butler rolled over on? The entire family was anti-democatic, if not downright treasonous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bush did not arrive there at 1:40.

The following info is taken from Baker's book and has been out there for a long time:

 

"...a man named Aubrey Irby-was with Bush at the time of Kennedy's murder. Along with about a hundred other people. For Bush was about to give a luncheon speech at the Blackstone Hotel. He had just started when Irby told him what had happened. Bush called off the speech." (Baker, p. 54)

 

The picture is taken at this point.  It was the call to the Bureau that was then made at 1:40.

Carlier, for you to then jump in and say that the critics are always going beyond the parameters of the evidence is so unfounded that its silly.  Sometimes they might do that in relation to trying to determine who actually killed JFK.  But as far as the overall forensic facts of the case, its been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that there was a conspiracy to kill the president. And that plot did not include Oswald as one of the assassins. Its the wrong rifle, its the wrong bullet and its the wrong brain.

Case closed.  Get over it  FC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Roy Wieselquist said:

**Ah yes, Ron, A. Welsh Dulles was at "a conference" in the Bahamas.  Thank you once again.  At least he was in the same general area.

Dulles went to Puerto Rico, ditching on the mission everyone but Kennedy knew was doomed to failure.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More on a what a rat Bush was.

 God Bob Parry's death was a blow to us all.  What a good journalist he was.  Unlike Amy Goodman, he really was not afraid to go anywhere.

After reading these two articles I posted, he sure does make a good circumstantial case.

 

https://consortiumnews.com/2018/12/03/bush-41s-october-surprise-denials-2/

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Andrew Prutsok said:

Wasn't his daddy Prescott central to the plot to depose FDR, the one that Smedley Butler rolled over on? The entire family was anti-democatic, if not downright treasonous.

Yes, if I remember right he was the focal point of finances for the operation.  Collecting contributions, paying bills, distributing funds for operations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is another "deal" theory of mine regards Reagan in 1980.

And this would involve the Catholic Church and Pope John Paul.

I don't have strong research facts to bolster my theory. 

It is simply and honestly from my own personal observations of the U.S. presidential 1980 election and noticing what I sensed was a socio-voting anomaly.

It had to do with Catholics voting for a party they traditionally didn't vote for except in the 1972 presidential election when almost everyone in this country was brainwashed into believing that George McGovern was actually a closet crime and hippie free love loving commie. The nation was terrified that he would promote violent chaos in the streets instead of law and order.

Perversely, the truth turned out to be that their "Law And Order" candidate ( Nixon ) and his political team gang were the real criminals and all but Nixon had to serve time because of their criminal acts.  McGovern turned out to be the real law abiding and moral straight arrow.

There were so many Catholic families where I grew up that they had their own schools including high school.

Most of them had very large families with many children. 

They were everywhere. Many of our neighbors were Catholics like this.

We knew they all voted Democrat. Always.

The Democrats back then seemed to represent a liberal ( help the poor and working class more than the rich) reputation. The edict of Christ himself.

But, in 1980, I noticed every Catholic family I knew just instantly switched to voting for the Republicans and Reagan that year.

It was a consensus in our three local Catholic churches.

I was so struck by this instant reversal of party voting loyalty I began asking why these Catholics were doing this.

I would say, you always vote for the party of the poor and workers and unions. Why switch to the party representing the rich now?

I could never get a real straight or well thought out answer from those I ask this question of. A few did say it was because of abortion and gave no other reason.

But, I had a sense that the Cardinals and Bishops of the church were instructing their priests here in the U.S. to urge their church flocks to vote for the Republicans that year.

I believe their doing so helped Reagan and the Republicans win the election.

I believe a "deal" between the Vatican and the Republican party was struck in 1980 where the leadership of the Catholic church  agreed to compel their millions of American faithful to vote against the Democrats that year.

To this day, I will never understand a true believer in the Catholic church doctrine of helping the poor and working class could ever justify voting for the party of the rich. For a candidate who crushed many of the labor unions in his time in office.

Edited by Joe Bauer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Andrew Prutsok said:

Wasn't his daddy Prescott central to the plot to depose FDR, the one that Smedley Butler rolled over on? The entire family was anti-democatic, if not downright treasonous.

Do you have any real evidence of this?  Actual evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:

Here is another "deal" theory of mine regards Reagan in 1980.

And this would involve the Catholic Church and Pope John Paul.

I don't have strong research facts to bolster my theory. 

It is simply and honestly from my own personal observations of the U.S. presidential 1980 election and noticing what I Sensed was a socio-voting anomaly.

It had to do with Catholics voting for a party they traditionally didn't vote for except in the 1972 presidential election when almost everyone in this country was brainwashed into believing that George McGovern was actually a closet crime and hippie free love loving commie. The nation was terrified that he would promote violent chaos in the streets instead of law and order.

Perversely, the truth turned out to be that their "Law And Order" candidate ( Nixon ) and his political team gang were the real criminals and all but Nixon had to serve time because of their criminal acts.  McGovern turned out to be the real law abiding and moral straight arrow.

There were so many Catholic families where I grew up that they had their own schools including high school.

Most of them had very large families with many children. 

They were everywhere. Many of our neighbors were Catholics like this.

We knew they all voted Democrat. Always.

The Democrats back then seemed to represent a liberal ( help the poor more and working class than the rich) reputation. The edict of Christ himself.

But, in 1980, I noticed every Catholic family I knew just instantly switched to voting for the Republicans and Reagan that year.

It was a consensus in our three local Catholic churches.

I was so struck by this instant reversal of party voting loyalty I began asking why these Catholics wee doing this.

I would say, you always vote for the party of the poor and workers and unions. Why switch to the party representing the rich now?

I could never ever get one straight answer from those I ask this question of. A few times they said it because of abortion.

But, I had a sense that the Cardinals and Bishops of the church were instructing their priests to urge their church flocks to vote for the Republicans that year.

I believe their doing so helped Reagan and the Republicans win the election.

I believe a "deal" between the Vatican and the Republican party here in the states in 1980 was struck where the leadership of the Catholic church  compelled their millions of American faithful to vote against the Democrats that year.

To this day, I will never understand a true believer in the Catholic church doctrine of helping the poor could ever justify voting for the party pf the rich.

So Catholics only have one political care, the poor?

Social issues, war, freedom of religion don't count?

There are lots of good reasons why Catholics like me are Republican.

Sometime come to Vegas and we can chat about it over a drink.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I will say is I was on Lawyers for Bush/Cheney 2004, God  give rest to his soul.  BTW,  my constitutional law professor was appointed by his son to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

Do you have any real evidence of this?  Actual evidence.

I was asking a question. If I had evidence, I wouldn't need to.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

I was wrong or couldn't find the right article about Prescott being the funnel for funds though I do think I read that somewhere.  But Prescott was a major contributor of funds to the planned coup.

https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/11/08/18628134.php

Thanks for the cite Ron. But sources for the author are minimal. Moreover he fails to show Bush’s involvement in any coup which, frankly, if it was real it is strange nothing came of the conspirators.  I have not read the testimony of this event so I cannot say much other than articles like this need sources linking the dots.  Thanks however. If you find a good video please share. One day when I have time perhaps I will read about this event more. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

So Catholics only have one political care, the poor?

Social issues, war, freedom of religion don't count?

There are lots of good reasons why Catholics like me are Republican.

Sometime come to Vegas and we can chat about it over a drink.

"Sometime come to Vegas and we can chat about it."

I hope that isn't a coded message meaning "break my knuckles"  is it?

Ha!  Just kidding Cory.

But Vegas isn't a place I would ever feel totally safe visiting.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Joe Bauer said:

"Sometime come to Vegas and we can chat about it."

I hope that isn't a coded message meaning "break my knuckles"  is it?

Ha!  Just kidding Cory.

But Vegas isn't a place I would ever feel totally safe visiting.

 

 

Lol ok.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...