Michael Collins Piper: Final Judgment

[Michael Collins Piper]

Folks, I haven't forgotten about you.

How could I forget such lovelies as that bigoted poppinjay, Andy Walker, who, I'm told, is particularly exercised about the fact that my name is "Michael Collins" Piper. Andy, yes, I'm a mick, forgive me for that.

And then there's Tim Gratz who is busy forum jumping. Posting crap about me and occasional commentary somewhat related to FINAL JUDGMENT on one thread and then another --- a very clever legal trick.

Plus there's Len Colby --- who brags that he wants to debunk conspiracy theories ---- and I guess that means all of them.

Folks, I occasionally have day to day work to take care of and just haven't had the time to respond to the LEGITIMATE QUESTIONS (not to mention the Walker-Gratz garbage --- I exempt Len Colby because of his ethnic concerns here) but I assure you I will.

In the meantime, without having read Gratz's latest emission on the other thread, which I gather is probably a reference to the Bass book which paints the LIE that it was JFK who forged the "special relationship" between Israel and the United States--- a lie that is easily debunked by such writers as

Pulitzer Prize winning Jewish-American historian Seymour Hersh in THE SAMSON OPTION

Progressive writers James and Leslie Cockburn in DANGEROUS LIAISONS; AND

Jewish-American historian Stephen Green in TAKING SIDES

All of whom make it very clear that the relationship between the US and Israel under JFK was considerably tense, at the least.

The Bass book plays up this theme that JFK sold Israel defensive conventional weapons and this is "proof" that JFK loved Israel and vice versa.

Bass---a so-called "Middle East scholar" --- was funded by Israeli interests. Doesn't that make him somewhat BIASED.

But the Bass book and the Gratz emissions do not take into account the SOLID HISTORICAL FACT that NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND THE ACQUISITION THEREOF WERE THE ABSOLUTE CORNERSTONE OF ISRAEL'S ENTIRE GEOPOLITICAL/NATIONAL DEFENSE STRATEGY AND JFK WAS TRYING TO STOP ISRAEL FROM BUILDING NUCLEAR WEAPONS.

Gratz knows this and he's a clever boy, but the bottom line is that the "line" that he is promoting --- that JFK was a "special friend" of Israel is ABSOLUTE CRAP.

Folks --- don't listen to Michael Collins Piper.

Read the above three-mentioned books.

And then also ask yourself the question: why in all of the hundreds of books written about JFK and his administration that there was not---until the last two years --- a book about JFK's Middle East policy?

And if you look in all of the books about JFK and his administration --- how much IF ANYTHING is said about his Middle East policy?

Why has all of that been pushed aside?

Was it not worthy of discussion?

In all the millions of words written about JFK in books focusing exclusively on his life and his presidency (excluding books about the assassination itself)--- his Cuba policy, his Soviet policy, his sexual affairs, his health condition, his assassination ---- his Middle East policy (found offensive by israel and its lobby in America) is hardly noted.

And if JFK was so pro-Israel, why was Abe Feinberg, the American Jewish community's unofficial liaison to the JFK White House, threatening JFK with withdrawal of American Jewish financial support in the 1964 election due to his Middle East foreign policy. (This has been referenced in a non-Holocaust Denial book, the specific citation escaping me at the moment.)

Prior to the release of FINAL JUDGMENT . . . How many "serious, scholarly" JFK assassination researchers EVER pondered JFK's efforts to stop israel from building the Hell Bomb and its possible impact on the

assassination conspiracy?

Tim Gratz: we know YOUR AGENDA. it is a pro-israel Neo-Conservative agenda. You are following the agenda of these insane lunatics, religious fundamentalist extremists, who dominate the policy mechanism in the Bush White House.

Let's rally together to fight all forms of extremism!

[Tim Gratz]

Piper wrote:

And then there's Tim Gratz who is busy forum jumping. Posting crap about me and occasional commentary somewhat related to FINAL JUDGMENT on one thread and then another --- a very clever legal trick.

Come on now I am attempting to determine if you subscribe to the hate spewed forth by your friends and associates. That is not crap. It is legitimate inquiry.

For instance, do you agree with Carto's statement:

If Satan himself, with all of his superhuman genius and diabolical ingenuity at his command, had tried to create a permanent disintegration and force for the destruction of the nations, he could have done no better than to invent the Jews.

That is about as anti-Semitic a sentiment as I have ever heard.

And do you subscribe to Carto's concerns about the "Niggerification" of America?

And your friend David Duke, with whom you have shared many platforms, has written numerous anti-Jewish and anti-black statements, including this one:

"It's really the Jew Marxists who see the n as their instrument, as their bullets, by which to destroy our society."

­- The Sun (Wichita, KS), April 23, 1975

****************************************

Time to face the music, Piper. Do you denounce Carto as an anti-Semite and a racist, or do you embrace him? Same question re David Duke. Do you renounce him as an anti-Semite and a racist, or do you embrace him?

And I assume we can correctly infer that you subscribe to the tenets of the Stormfront organization?

Do I believe in the "pro-Israel" agenda of the "neoconservatives"? Well that may be one of the few things you've got right, Piper. You see I believe that the Old Testament, a book you have called "degenerative" is the inspired Word of the most Holy God, a God to whom you will one day have to answer to. It is interesting that you refer to the "lunatics" in the WH when to almost all civilized men it is your views and the views of your cronies that are lunatic. I will stand proudly with gentleman patriots such as Paul Wolfowitz and Michael Nowak while you share your platforms with the likes of men such as Carto and Duke whose thinking is clearly clouded by their racial hatred (as is your own).

Edited February 24, 2006 by Tim Gratz

[Tim Gratz]

Piper, from his Post # 61 on this thread:

Tim Gratz: we know YOUR AGENDA. it is a pro-israel Neo-Conservative agenda. You are following the agenda of these insane lunatics . . .

But on this very Forum (in the thread on his biography) Piper wrote:

The last resort . . .

Question the sanity and stability of those who disagree with you or whom you perceive to have ideas that don't accord with yours.

Interesting, is it not? I guess one can conclude that Piper has had to stoop to what he calls the "last resort": questioning the sanity of one's opponents.

Edited February 24, 2006 by Tim Gratz

[Pat Speer]

I don't know, Tim. I suspect Piper has a point about Wolfowitz... any guy who spits on his comb to wet his hair is a bit of a yucchy, as far as I'm concerned... Not to mention that he is the architect of a seemingly pointless American exercise that is bankrupting our government and has caused the deaths of thousands of Americans, an exercise that has pushed Iraq to the verge of civil war, a civil war that could result in the deaths of millions of people who never voted for Wolfowitz or the fools who blindly followed his ideas. What's your holy Bible say about that? Is that a good thing? Ask yourself honestly who is worse: a man who espouses crackpot ideas that ultimately do no harm, or a well-intentioned idealogue whose complete incapability to grasp the reality of other cultures results in the deaths of millions? Are we to be judged by our thoughts or our actions? If the lives of others are so meaningless to you then you have no business lecturing Piper or anyone else about anything. Are you "bored" with the deaths caused by the Bush Administration's reckless and incompetent strategies to "democratize" the mid-east? What will it take for you to admit Bush's mid-east policy has been a disaster?

Edited February 24, 2006 by Pat Speer

[Mark Stapleton]

I don't know, Tim. I suspect Piper has a point about Wolfowitz... any guy who spits on his comb to wet his hair is a bit of a yucchy, as far as I'm concerned... Not to mention that he is the architect of a seemingly pointless American exercise that is bankrupting our government and has caused the deaths of thousands of Americans, an exercise that has pushed Iraq to the verge of civil war, a civil war that could result in the deaths of millions of people who never voted for Wolfowitz or the fools who blindly followed his ideas. What's your holy Bible say about that? Is that a good thing? Ask yourself honestly who is worse: a man who espouses crackpot ideas that ultimately do no harm, or a well-intentioned idealogue whose complete incapability to grasp the reality of other cultures results in the deaths of millions? Are we to be judged by our thoughts or our actions? If the lives of others are so meaningless to you then you have no business lecturing Piper or anyone else about anything. Are you "bored" with the deaths caused by the Bush Administration's reckless and incompetent strategies to "democratize" the mid-east? What will it take for you to admit Bush's mid-east policy has been a disaster?

Pat,

Nice post. Tim, you are going to have to face these questions. Have a good, hard look at the Bush Government's policies because they will burden America for quite a while.

Edited February 24, 2006 by Mark Stapleton

[Michael Collins Piper]

The reason why I have concerns about Debra Conway is that she vowed in writing to stand with the Anti-Defamation League and the Jewish Defense League in picketing me and working to prevent me from speaking publicly about the JFK assassination.

The Jewish Defense League is a known terrorist organization that has been linked to the murder of Alex Odeh, an Arab-American civil rights activist, and to the crippling of a young man in New Jersey who was the victim of a bomb that the JDL meant for an alleged "Nazi" war criminal. The JDL was also implicated in the murder of a Jewish woman who was the secretary of impresario Sol Hurok whose office was bombed in New York (if I recall) by the Jewish Defense League.

Two leaders of the JDL threatened my life at the very time Miss Conway was lending her moral support to these violent terrorists. These two later died in prison after having been taken into custody on terrorism conspiracy charges.

That Miss Conway would give her support to a terrorist group is of great concern to me.

I am strongly anti-terrorist and, frankly, always have been, particularly after I learned about the Lavon Affair in Israel wherein the Israel government was financing terrorist attacks on U.S. and British installations with the intent of making it appear that they were the work of the Muslim Brotherhood----all of this in an attempt to undermine the government of Egypt's Nasser.

If the United States had hit Israel with a few missiles or taken the Israeli leadership into the dock and hanged them as war criminals after that business, it might have put a dent in the idea that terrorists could monkey with our country!

I really hate terrorism and I really pray that Debra Conway will someday see the error of her ways in siding with a terrorist group.

[Michael Collins Piper]

Tim Gratz is really over the top.

He says that I have shared "many platforms" with David Duke.

Well, I have shared platforms with David Duke and I do not apologize for that.

But I am curious as to the source of Gratz's lie that I have shared "many" platforms with Duke.

Does Tim Gratz expect 60-65 percent of the white voters of the state of Louisiana to apologize for the fact that they twice voted for David Duke for both governor and United States Senator?

Whether Gratz likes it or not.

Many of these are the same folks that voted for George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan . . . hmmmmmm.

Don Black: I've met him several times, having shared hardly more than a few words.

I have never been a member of his Stormfront, have never posted there. Yet Tim Gratz would have us believe that --- because somebody said something nice about me there that I should therefore be required to endorse or repudiate whatever else appears there.

As I've said before: Afro-Cuba web has posted a favorable review of FINAL JUDGMENT (actually something I believe I wrote).

Does that make me a pro-Castro type? Do I have to endorse or repudiate everything on the Afro-Cuba web?

Yet Gratz persists in this lie conecting me to Black and asks me to condemn or endorse him and/or something somebody sometime somewhere posted on his Stormfront about something.

yes, Gratz is a xxxx. He's really a shameless xxxx.

[Tim Gratz]

Members of course are astute enough to notice how Piper avoids having to either endorse or renounce the despicable racist views of Don Black, founder of Stormfront.

It is my understanding that Black was a principal organizer of the American Renaissance Conference at which Piper spoke. (See Andy Walker's Post # 17) in the JFK Debate thread: "The Book That Demolishes 'Final Judgment" ". The 2006 conference is heavily promoted on the Stormfront website.

Indeed, this is from the Stormfront website:

http://www.stormfront.org/forum/calendar.p...-5-20&e=205&c=1

To Piper:

Your picture is there right with the rest of the fascists.

Piper, I bounce the ball back to you. I do not really care how many times you have talked to Black.

Here is a very simple question: do you accept and support his racist nonsense, or not?

Calls for a "yes" or "no" answer. Please don't duck it again. Members are entitled to know whether you are a racist or not.

I find it most informative that you do not apologize for sharing a platform with David Duke, of all people. And I don't care how many white southernors voted for him (although the fact that even one did sickens me). Duke is cut from the same cloth as Black.

Edited February 25, 2006 by Tim Gratz

[Pat Speer]

Tim, while I agree with you that there is probably nothing to Piper's claims, since I haven't read his book--too busy working on my own theory at the moment--I don't feel qualified to pounce on his theory. I do find your relentless attack on the man interesting. Why is it incumbent upon him to renounce every man he knows whose views you dislike? I sometimes go into enemy territory and write on alt.assassination.JFK, a forum dominated by lone-nutters. Whenever I make a point over there which one of them can't answer, the thread is flagged with a "Chad or Paul, Please Respond" comment at the top of the thread. Obviously, there's an agenda behind the forum, whereby every conspiracy challenge must be met, usually through b.s. and obfuscation. Even so, if I was asked on this forum by John Simkin to renounce John McAdams I would not. Nor would I renounce the views of James Fetzer or Jack White or Tim Gratz over there. There's something un-American about judging someone by their acquaintances. We learned that in the McCarthy era you claim to despise. (Not that this stops right-wingers from employing this tactic today--remember the e-mail campaign linking John Kerry to "Hanoi Jane" when they'd merely been to the same peace rally?) You haven't exactly renounced Richard Nixon, William F. Buckley, or George W. Bush, last I checked. I don't think it's realistic for you to ask Piper to renounce the views of every controversial person he's ever met or been friends with. What is this, an inquistion?

And Piper has a point about the JDL. My sister's ex-boyfriend, the one whose father had spent time in the camps and had seen the horror of the holocaust firsthand, told me stories about his college days, and Irv Rubin. He told me that Rubin was a crackpot. Years later, Rubin got arrested here in L.A. As I remember he and his "defense league" were preparing to blow up a mosque. I don't remember if he was convicted. It's intriguing that almost all talk of terrorism revolves around Muslims, when the most active terrorists in the U.S. pre- 9/11 have been Armenians, Jews, and white survivalist militia-types. This incident involving the JDL was awhile back now, so it's possible they've renounced Rubin and his tactics and are more in line with the NAACP today. I suspect at this time its no more accurate to call them terrorists than it is to call David Duke a klansmen. Didn't Duke leave the klan back in the eighties? I could be wrong about that, but I seem to recall Duke backing down from a lot of his extreme views some time ago, and re-inventing himself as a good Bible Belt Republican much like yourself. I trust you'll correct me if I'm wrong.

[Tim Gratz]

Pat, what you do not apparently understand are that these are people with whom Piper regularly associates presumably because they share a cohesion of philosophical and political viewpoints. Piper has attended at least two conferences involving David Duke (one of which was held in Moscow). I believe that Piper may have even worked for Carto or one of Carto's organizations. Under the circumstances it is reasonable to ask Piper whether he shares the filthy outrageous views of the people with whom he regularly has intercourse.

For instance, Don Black succeeded David Duke as the Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, and later formed Stormfront. Black either sponsored or heavily promoted the 2005 conference in New Orleans at which Piper was a featured speaker. It can be reasonably infered that the conference was sponsored by Stormfront.

Here is what Black has posted re Martin Luther King, Jr.:

He was a "sexual degenerate, an America-hating Communist; a criminal betrayer of even the interests of his own people; . . he was a despicable hypocrite, an immoral degenerate, and a worthless charlatan."

I do not think it unreasonable to ask whether Piper endorses or renounces those views.

You attempted to analogize the situation to your posting on the McAdams' alt.assassination.jfk forum populated by many "lone nutters". Well, if every other member of that forum regularly posted messages claiming that JFK was a Communist traitor who deserved to die, I guess it would be reasonable to ask you if you agreed with those sentiments.

It might constitute "guilt by association" if I simply infered that Piper agreed with each and every outrageous statement of Carto, Duke and Piper. But I have NOT done that, have I? Rather, I have posted some of the more outrageous opinions expressed by that trio and asked him whether or not he agreed with those opinions.

Let me tell you this: Piper participated in a meeting organized by Duke and he said right here he was not ashamed to share a platform with Duke. Well, Duke was the head of the Ku Klux Klan, an organization that regularly terrorized and lynched black people, Jews and Catholics, murdered civil rights workers, and bombed churches killing little black girls about the age of my precious daughter. I do not want to express in a public forum what I would do with a racist who killed helpless little girls but let me tell you I think the guy would curse the day he was born before I finished with him. And Piper clings to the successor to thje organization that nurtured those murdering bigots. No mere words can adequately express my outrage at the likes of Duke, Black and crew.

I know that Andy Walker, John Dolva and Len Colby share my indigation at the likes of Carto, Black, Duke and Piper. I think my outrage is perhaps analagous to the hatred and contempt that RFK had for organized crime.

Let me tell you something: in the eyes of God, the lives of each of those little children killed by Duke's predecessors in the KKK had equal value to the life of John F. Kennedy or George W. Bush (and I know that Bush himself believes that). I hope and pray for Piper's redemption, bearing in mind that 200 years ago persons who were the vilest slavetraders, after meeting God, became the leaders of the anti-slavery abolitionist movement. But I am convinced that if Piper does not acknowledge his sins, that God has reserved one of the hotter places in hell for those who, like Piper, have demeaned His people, the Jews.

Edited February 26, 2006 by Tim Gratz

[Pat Speer]

Tim, I followed you till the last part. If Piper subscribes to the outrageous and hateful views of neo-Nazis and the Klan, he should say so before we give his ideas careful consideration. An expert witness on creationism who just so happens to be a member of a fundamentalist church should say so before he testifies, yes? If Piper believes there is something innately dishonest or vile about Jews, then this might very well have colored his judgment. In that context, I agree that your questions are appropriate. I don't believe he should be asked to reject or refute specific statements from specific individuals, however. I think it's more fair for us to ask him if he has an active dislike for the state of Israel and/or the Jewish people. If he says no and you can find quotes from him showing this not to be true, then you have discredited him.

So, Mr. Piper, do you have a dislike for the state of Israel and/or the Jewish people? If so, did this dislike precede your research into the Kennedy assassination (or even inspire it) or did it derive out of your research?

[Tim Gratz]

A very good point, Pat.

It is my point (and also I believe the point of Andy, John and Len) that Piper's ideas are so abhorrent and evil that he does not deserve to sit at a table and discourse with honorable men.

I do think it is reasonable to ask him whether he renounces the morally outrageous views of the people with whom he associates, e.g. Carto, Duke and Black. I understand that he has been very closely associated with Carto.

Your point that his anti-semitic views (his recent post: "I don't care if I am considered an anti-Semite") probably influenced his "final judgment".

I think it fair to say no serious scholar of the Kennedy assassination agrees with the scenario that Piper advances.

I know, and it is hard to contemplate, that Mark Lane has been associated with Carto and Liberty Lobby. But I have yet to read that Lane accept's Piper's premise. There is certainly no indication of that in Lane's most recent book, is there?

[Pat Speer]

Lane believed the CIA was involved. I'm unaware of his deciding that Mossad was involved as well.

[Tim Gratz]

I agree with Pat that that seems to be Lane's most recently expressed opinion.

[Mark Stapleton]

Folks, I haven't forgotten about you.

How could I forget such lovelies as that bigoted poppinjay, Andy Walker, who, I'm told, is particularly exercised about the fact that my name is "Michael Collins" Piper. Andy, yes, I'm a mick, forgive me for that.

And then there's Tim Gratz who is busy forum jumping. Posting crap about me and occasional commentary somewhat related to FINAL JUDGMENT on one thread and then another --- a very clever legal trick.

Plus there's Len Colby --- who brags that he wants to debunk conspiracy theories ---- and I guess that means all of them.

Folks, I occasionally have day to day work to take care of and just haven't had the time to respond to the LEGITIMATE QUESTIONS (not to mention the Walker-Gratz garbage --- I exempt Len Colby because of his ethnic concerns here) but I assure you I will.

In the meantime, without having read Gratz's latest emission on the other thread, which I gather is probably a reference to the Bass book which paints the LIE that it was JFK who forged the "special relationship" between Israel and the United States--- a lie that is easily debunked by such writers as

Pulitzer Prize winning Jewish-American historian Seymour Hersh in THE SAMSON OPTION

Progressive writers James and Leslie Cockburn in DANGEROUS LIAISONS; AND

Jewish-American historian Stephen Green in TAKING SIDES

All of whom make it very clear that the relationship between the US and Israel under JFK was considerably tense, at the least.

The Bass book plays up this theme that JFK sold Israel defensive conventional weapons and this is "proof" that JFK loved Israel and vice versa.

Bass---a so-called "Middle East scholar" --- was funded by Israeli interests. Doesn't that make him somewhat BIASED.

But the Bass book and the Gratz emissions do not take into account the SOLID HISTORICAL FACT that NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND THE ACQUISITION THEREOF WERE THE ABSOLUTE CORNERSTONE OF ISRAEL'S ENTIRE GEOPOLITICAL/NATIONAL DEFENSE STRATEGY AND JFK WAS TRYING TO STOP ISRAEL FROM BUILDING NUCLEAR WEAPONS.

Gratz knows this and he's a clever boy, but the bottom line is that the "line" that he is promoting --- that JFK was a "special friend" of Israel is ABSOLUTE CRAP.

Folks --- don't listen to Michael Collins Piper.

Read the above three-mentioned books.

And then also ask yourself the question: why in all of the hundreds of books written about JFK and his administration that there was not---until the last two years --- a book about JFK's Middle East policy?

And if you look in all of the books about JFK and his administration --- how much IF ANYTHING is said about his Middle East policy?

Why has all of that been pushed aside?

Was it not worthy of discussion?

In all the millions of words written about JFK in books focusing exclusively on his life and his presidency (excluding books about the assassination itself)--- his Cuba policy, his Soviet policy, his sexual affairs, his health condition, his assassination ---- his Middle East policy (found offensive by israel and its lobby in America) is hardly noted.

And if JFK was so pro-Israel, why was Abe Feinberg, the American Jewish community's unofficial liaison to the JFK White House, threatening JFK with withdrawal of American Jewish financial support in the 1964 election due to his Middle East foreign policy. (This has been referenced in a non-Holocaust Denial book, the specific citation escaping me at the moment.)

Prior to the release of FINAL JUDGMENT . . . How many "serious, scholarly" JFK assassination researchers EVER pondered JFK's efforts to stop israel from building the Hell Bomb and its possible impact on the

assassination conspiracy?

Tim Gratz: we know YOUR AGENDA. it is a pro-israel Neo-Conservative agenda. You are following the agenda of these insane lunatics, religious fundamentalist extremists, who dominate the policy mechanism in the Bush White House.

Let's rally together to fight all forms of extremism!

Tim,

I notice you haven't addressed the issues in this post from Mr. Piper. The feeble argument that JFK was a special friend of Israel appears to be full of holes. It appears to be as fragile as your short lived assertion that Theodore Racoosin and JFK were close friends (not a single mention of Racoosin in Dallek's 800 page bio of JFK).

All your posts focus on Mr. Piper's associates and which meetings he attended. But what about the book and the assassination, Tim. What about them?