Jump to content
The Education Forum

Israel,LBJ and the JFK assassination


Recommended Posts

How amusing. Prior to this you spoke of the "Jews" and "Israel" as if they were one and the same.

oh really? what's amusing is how you continue to dodge the context of this thread and your persistence to insinuate i have a problem with Jews and that i'm an anti semite rather even once adress the theory of this topic.

I think your previous comments and the material on the sites you link to convicts you of anti-semitism. And sorry if I have expressed little interest thus far in the Mossad-did-it theory, as the only evidence I have seen thus far relates to PERMINDEX, whose links to the CIA are much more clearly documented and stronger than the supposed Mossad ones. I've also already had some unpleasant interaction with Mr. Piper, though I confess to not having read his book. After coming across his article that attempted to lower the number of holocaust dead through straw man argumentation, I lost interest in trying to obtain it. If he has some more substantial arguments, I'd like to see them.

Edited by Owen Parsons
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 81
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

How amusing. Prior to this you spoke of the "Jews" and "Israel" as if they were one and the same.

oh really? what's amusing is how you continue to dodge the context of this thread and your persistence to insinuate i have a problem with Jews and that i'm an anti semite rather even once adress the theory of this topic.

I think your previous comments and the material on the sites you link to convicts you of anti-semitism. And sorry if I have expressed little interest thus far in the Mossad-did-it theory, as the only evidence I have seen thus far relates to PERMINDEX, whose links to the CIA are much more clearly documented and stronger than the supposed Mossad ones. I've also already had some unpleasant interaction with Mr. Piper, though I confess to not having read his book. After coming across his article that attempted to lower the number of holocaust dead through straw man argumentation, I lost interest in trying to obtain it. If he has some more substantial arguments, I'd like to see them.

Ah yes. The moment has arrived. The self appointed judge and jury now convicts Mark Wilson of that most heinous of crimes. You should have a cup of tea and calm down.

I was going to suggest you read Piper's book but on second thoughts, don't bother.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark - It sounds an awful lot to me that you are saying:

1) The Goverment and media are responsible for the cover up.

2) The Goverment and media are controlled by Jewish Zionists.

3) The Government and media are covering for the assassins because they have something to hide.

4) thus Jewish Zionists are probably responsible for the assassination

You said 1 and 3 explicitly, 2 and 4 were implicit. Please elaborate.

What evidence do you have that the US goverment banned "Final Judgement" or any other books?

Len

hi Len.i'm not going feed into to your loaded analysis of my statements ...

In the post you quoted above I was questioning the other Mark about his statements which should have been obvious since I quoted him and not you. As for my doubts regarding your questionable statements see posts 50 and 53.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah yes. The moment has arrived. The self appointed judge and jury now convicts Mark Wilson of that most heinous of crimes. You should have a cup of tea and calm down.

I was going to suggest you read Piper's book but on second thoughts, don't bother.

Mark STAPLETON

- Aren't YOU acting as a "self appointed judge and jury"

- Bigotry isn't THE "most heinous of crimes" but it's up there

- I don't suppose you're planning to read any books by Meir Kahane, David Duke or Edgar J. Steeele any time in the near future are you? I read the 2 chapters Piper made available here, read his posts and read what he said and wrote else where that was quite enough.

Len

Edited by Len Colby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe we could do something productive here on this thread - like considering how to start the process of forcing Bloomfield's files to be released, and ensuring that they don't accidentally get burned in a fire, shredded to make space, or routinely destroyed.

http://somesecretsforyou.blogspot.com/

Louis Mortimer Bloomfield

ARE CANADA NATIONAL ARCHIVES HIDING THE KEY OF THE JFK MYSTERY?

OSS veteran, Louis-Mortimer Bloomfield is perceived by some as the architect of the assassination plot against President John F. Kennedy. Before its death, this Montreal lawyer donated his personal papers to Canada National Archives, under condition that they are made public twenty years after his death. However, more than one year after the end of this delay, Library and Archives Canada refuses to make available the Bloomfield documents. Will a legal battle carry out revelation of new information on the JFK assassination?

posted by youshouldknow @ 12:41 AM 0 comments

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe we could do something productive here on this thread - like considering how to start the process of forcing Bloomfield's files to be released, and ensuring that they don't accidentally get burned in a fire, shredded to make space, or routinely destroyed.

http://somesecretsforyou.blogspot.com/

Louis Mortimer Bloomfield

ARE CANADA NATIONAL ARCHIVES HIDING THE KEY OF THE JFK MYSTERY?

OSS veteran, Louis-Mortimer Bloomfield is perceived by some as the architect of the assassination plot against President John F. Kennedy. Before its death, this Montreal lawyer donated his personal papers to Canada National Archives, under condition that they are made public twenty years after his death. However, more than one year after the end of this delay, Library and Archives Canada refuses to make available the Bloomfield documents. Will a legal battle carry out revelation of new information on the JFK assassination?

posted by youshouldknow @ 12:41 AM 0 comments

Good idea, Lee. Personally I doubt if Bloomfield, if involved, would include any mention of it in his papers but they would sure be an excellent read.

Edited by Mark Stapleton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe we could do something productive here on this thread - like considering how to start the process of forcing Bloomfield's files to be released, and ensuring that they don't accidentally get burned in a fire, shredded to make space, or routinely destroyed.

http://somesecretsforyou.blogspot.com/

Louis Mortimer Bloomfield

ARE CANADA NATIONAL ARCHIVES HIDING THE KEY OF THE JFK MYSTERY?

OSS veteran, Louis-Mortimer Bloomfield is perceived by some as the architect of the assassination plot against President John F. Kennedy. Before its death, this Montreal lawyer donated his personal papers to Canada National Archives, under condition that they are made public twenty years after his death. However, more than one year after the end of this delay, Library and Archives Canada refuses to make available the Bloomfield documents. Will a legal battle carry out revelation of new information on the JFK assassination?

posted by youshouldknow @ 12:41 AM 0 comments

Good idea, Lee. Personally I doubt if Bloomfield, if involved, would include any mention of it in his papers but they would sure be an excellent read.

I did various google searches and could find no other mention of Bloomfeild’s papers being held by the National Archives of Canada (let alone them not being released) so all we have is the word of a semi-literate anonymous blogger. You’d think if the story were true it would appear elsewhere on the Net. The author does not provide any citation or evidence that what he claims is true. You’d think if it were true he’d be able to provide a citation. We are not even told why supposedly the papers aren’t being released.

Even if true as Mark pointed out the papers would be unlikely to shed any evidence on the assassination even if he was involved.

Although he worked at various times for the Canadian and American governments Bloomfield was a private citizen, therefore no one is entitled to see his papers unless their caretaker (the archives) and his estate agree. If I am not mistaken in the US even a former president’s PRIVATE papers are only released to the public if he and/or his estate agree, I imagine in Canada it’s the same.

Should Bloomfield have less privacy rights just because a couple of less than credible authors* have linked him to the assassination? I imagine if you made a list of all the people ever identified as being a key player in any book about the assassination it would have hundreds of names on it. Does the public have the right to see the private papers of all these people?

*One was anonymous the other has a career long association with neo-Nazis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you let a black stipper charge rape against the Duke lacross team

So if it were a white stripper you'd find the charges more credible? It sounds like you have problems with blacks and Jews. I lived in the South when I was a kid and know it has changed a lot over the last couple of decades, apparently in some corners of Virginia it hasn't changed enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How amusing. Prior to this you spoke of the "Jews" and "Israel" as if they were one and the same.

oh really? what's amusing is how you continue to dodge the context of this thread and your persistence to insinuate i have a problem with Jews and that i'm an anti semite rather even once adress the theory of this topic.

I think your previous comments and the material on the sites you link to convicts you of anti-semitism.

You're entitled to your opinion.You are to be commended for putting a stop to the beating around the "Bush" and doing what you do best,name calling and diverting.Youve done all you can do to this point,now, all that's left is to keep repeating it over and over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm interested to note that Len Colby quotes Bertrand Russell in his signature.

Russell, of course, was an early critic of the Warren Commission Report. Indeed, his rebuttal was published almost at the same time - see 16 Questions on the Assassination

Given Lord Russell's authority, one might have expected that his lucid assault on the official version of the assassination would carry a lot of weight.

However, Russell's attack was blunted by at least two factors.

First, it attracted little mass media attention. What coverage there was - in Time and the Guardian - was hostile to and dismissive of his thesis.

Second, even within specialist journals of the left, Russell was vigorously counter-attacked.

For more on this, see a brief account of Russell's role in JFK assassination follow-up investigations HERE

One of Russell's most prominent critics on the left - not in general, but specifically regarding the JFK assassination - was I.F Stone. Stone was VERY influential within the American left at the time. He has been immortalized, among other things, for his famous comment that 'Governments lie'.

However, in this particular case, Stone would not countenance government deception. Read Stone's article of October 5th, 1964

He is every bit as persuasive as Posner! In fact, Stone served as the prototype for a professional Warren Commission ‘true believer’.

What a strange role for I.F. Stone to play - Stone, the well-known skeptic of government and all its shenanigans, the prominent and influential critic of corporate crimes and unaccountable US Government agencies such as the CIA.. How out of character!

Now, I.F. Stone had a similar background to Noam Chomsky. He was born of Jewish parentage, was sympathetic to Zionism in his youth, and latterly became known as a left-wing intellectual, somewhat unsympathetic to Israel - at least in its more extreme manifestations..

Both were lifelong supporters of the Warren Commission's conclusions - despite all the evidence to the contrary. Chomsky has maintained his opposition to 'conspiracy theories' through into the 21st Century. He was one of the first prominent voices on the left to decry those who doubt the official account of 9-11.

There is a growing perception in sophisticated left cricles that Chomsky is, in reality, a "left-gatekeeper" - see for instance Jeff Blankfort's critique in this interview. There's an interesting account of Chomsky as a drag on the 'JFK Truth Movement' here.

To my knowledge, I. F. Stone has not attracted this kind of criticism until now. As he died more than a decade ago. Stone has been somewhat shielded from debate via the internet - after all, he's no longer a contemporary commentator.

But I believe I.F. Stone must also be under suspicion as a deep level Zionist agent / ally. Someone to be called upon in cases of extreme importance only - such as spinning away left-wing interest in the assassination of JFK, back when the truth about the Dallas murders really was a hot issue - in 1964.

In my opinion, the strange and anomalous behaviour of both I. F. Stone and Noam Chomsky in relation to the JFK assassination makes sense only if:

[a] Final Judgment is essentially correct i.e. pro-Israeli forces coordinated the JFK assassination, co-opting allies outside their immediate network as necessary.

Both I. F. Stone and Noam Chomsky have a deep loyalty to the Zionist cause - deeper than their loyalty to the truth.

________________________

In anticipation of the accusation of ‘anti-Semitism’ (a near certainty, I wearily imagine), I’d like to say that I believe the term to be inherently meaningless. Because it lacks precise meaning, an accusation of ‘anti-Semitism’, once levied, cannot be refuted. That’s why it’s so useful to those who deploy it as a weapon.

Why should someone, like myself, with strong sympathies for the Palestinian cause be ‘anti-Semitic’? (most Palestinians speak Arabic). Why should someone who admires many of the alleged sayings of Jesus Christ be ‘anti-Semitic’ (he spoke Aramaic), On the other hand, I dislike a number of self-styled Jews who speak barely a word of Hebrew, Arabic - or any other Semitic language.

To anticipate a more meaningful accusation, am I ‘anti-Jewish’?

The truth is that in some cases, I am. In other cases, I’m not. It depends… I don't hold opinions that attempt to encompass millions of people in a single crass generalization.

Jeff Blankfort, for instance, I regard as one of the unsung heroes of our times. I’m also impressed by the writings of Gilad Atzmon, Israel Shamir, Paul Eisen and Israel Shahak. I like the work – and the humanity – of artists such as Daniel Barenboim and Yehudi Menuhin. I could list more – a lot more – Jews for whom I have great respect.

Chomsky and Stone I’m inclined to put in a different category, for reasons I've already provided.

I might make a similar observation about Jewish organizations. I like some of them. I dislike others. This one I hold in the highest regard. This one disgusts me.

There is clearly NOT an evil conspiracy so vast it encompasses all Jewish people.

There are, however, quite evidently conspiracies that involve numerous Jewish people.

I’d make a similar comment about Brits, Italians or Chinese.

There is evidence, however, as our world races headlong towards globalization, that Jewish (and specifically Zionist) conspiratorial networks are increasingly winning out over - or swallowing up - their competitors.

The Zionist movement did not invent evil, but taken as a whole, it does seem to be very proficient at it.

Edited by Sid Walker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm interested to note that Len Colby quotes Bertrand Russell in his signature.

Russell, of course, was an early critic of the Warren Commission Report. Indeed, his rebuttal was published almost at the same time - see 16 Questions on the Assassination

Given Lord Russell's authority, one might have expected that his lucid assault on the official version of the assassination would carry a lot of weight.

However, Russell's attack was blunted by at least two factors.

First, it attracted little mass media attention. What coverage there was - in Time and the Guardian - was hostile to and dismissive of his thesis.

Second, even within specialist journals of the left, Russell was vigorously counter-attacked.

For more on this, see a brief account of Russell's role in JFK assassination follow-up investigations HERE

One of Russell's most prominent critics on the left - not in general, but specifically regarding the JFK assassination - was I.F Stone. Stone was VERY influential within the American left at the time. He has been immortalized, among other things, for his famous comment that 'Governments lie'.

However, in this particular case, Stone would not countenance government deception. Read Stone's article of October 5th, 1964

He is every bit as persuasive as Posner! In fact, Stone served as the prototype for a professional Warren Commission ‘true believer’.

What a strange role for I.F. Stone to play - Stone, the well-known skeptic of government and all its shenanigans, the prominent and influential critic of corporate crimes and unaccountable US Government agencies such as the CIA.. How out of character!

Now, I.F. Stone had a similar background to Noam Chomsky. He was born of Jewish parentage, was sympathetic to Zionism in his youth, and latterly became known as a left-wing intellectual, somewhat unsympathetic to Israel - at least in its more extreme manifestations..

Both were lifelong supporters of the Warren Commission's conclusions - despite all the evidence to the contrary. Chomsky has maintained his opposition to 'conspiracy theories' through into the 21st Century. He was one of the first prominent voices on the left to decry those who doubt the official account of 9-11.

There is a growing perception in sophisticated left cricles that Chomsky is, in reality, a "left-gatekeeper" - see for instance Jeff Blankfort's critique in this interview. There's an interesting account of Chomsky as a drag on the 'JFK Truth Movement' here.

To my knowledge, I. F. Stone has not attracted this kind of criticism until now. As he died more than a decade ago. Stone has been somewhat shielded from debate via the internet - after all, he's no longer a contemporary commentator.

But I believe I.F. Stone must also be under suspicion as a deep level Zionist agent / ally. Someone to be called upon in cases of extreme importance only - such as spinning away left-wing interest in the assassination of JFK, back when the truth about the Dallas murders really was a hot issue - in 1964.

In my opinion, the strange and anomalous behaviour of both I. F. Stone and Noam Chomsky in relation to the JFK assassination makes sense only if:

[a] Final Judgment is essentially correct i.e. pro-Israeli forces coordinated the JFK assassination, co-opting allies outside their immediate network as necessary.

Both I. F. Stone and Noam Chomsky have a deep loyalty to the Zionist cause - deeper than their loyalty to the truth.

________________________

In anticipation of the accusation of ‘anti-Semitism’ (a near certainty, I wearily imagine), I’d like to say that I believe the term to be inherently meaningless. Because it lacks precise meaning, an accusation of ‘anti-Semitism’, once levied, cannot be refuted. That’s why it’s so useful to those who deploy it as a weapon.

Why should someone, like myself, with strong sympathies for the Palestinian cause be ‘anti-Semitic’? (most Palestinians speak Arabic). Why should someone who admires many of the alleged sayings of Jesus Christ be ‘anti-Semitic’ (he spoke Aramaic), On the other hand, I dislike a number of self-styled Jews who speak barely a word of Hebrew, Arabic - or any other Semitic language.

To anticipate a more meaningful accusation, am I ‘anti-Jewish’?

The truth is that in some cases, I am. In other cases, I’m not. It depends… I don't hold opinions that attempt to encompass millions of people in a single crass generalization.

Jeff Blankfort , for instance, I regard as one of the unsung heroes of our times. I’m also impressed by the writings of Gilad Atzmon, Israel Shamir, Paul Eisen and Israel Shahak. I like the work – and the humanity – of artists such as Daniel Barenboim and Yehudi Menuhin. I could list more – a lot more – Jews for whom I have great respect.

Chomsky and Stone I’m inclined to put in a different category, for reasons I've already provided.

I might make a similar observation about Jewish organizations. I like some of them. I dislike others. This one I hold in the highest regard. This one disgusts me.

There is clearly NOT an evil conspiracy so vast it encompasses all Jewish people.

There are, however, quite evidently conspiracies that involve numerous Jewish people.

I’d make a similar comment about Brits, Italians or Chinese.

There is evidence, however, as our world races headlong towards globalization, that Jewish (and specifically Zionist) conspiratorial networks are increasingly winning out over - or swallowing up - their competitors.

The Zionist movement did not invent evil, but taken as a whole, it does seem to very proficient at it.

A fantastic posting that deserves its own thread. I have started one here:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6592

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you let a black stipper charge rape against the Duke lacross team

So if it were a white stripper you'd find the charges more credible? It sounds like you have problems with blacks and Jews. I lived in the South when I was a kid and know it has changed a lot over the last couple of decades, apparently in some corners of Virginia it hasn't changed enough.

More out of context quotes,how surprising?

in case you were so appalled when you read the "black stripper Duke lacross team" comment that you couldnt read further because of the shock,here's the entire quote;

....We've got spies,bribes, crooked congressmen,secrets being stolen,pardons,treason,wars being started,and manipulation transpiring every day that CLEARLY benefits Israel which gets little if any mention by the "american" media but you let a black stipper charge rape against the Duke lacross team, or a woman walking around with semen from 2 different men in her undergarments claiming Kobe Bryant raped her and watch the 'american' media cover a story....Full hours,multiple shows nightly on multiple channels.....OJ,Kobe,Monica,Lacy Peterson this list goes on.....

Now,i described the Duke and Kobe rape allegations in the generic way the media described and promoted these events.....How come the headlines about these affairs didnt read, Kobe rapes white woman in Colorado? or Woman raped by Duke lacross team.......I didnt report these stories,don't blame me for how the media portrays the major headlines.......again, more deflections to get off the original topic,in the most disingenous way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In anticipation of the accusation of 'anti-Semitism' (a near certainty, I wearily imagine), I'd like to say that I believe the term to be inherently meaningless. Because it lacks precise meaning, an accusation of 'anti-Semitism', once levied, cannot be refuted. That's why it's so useful to those who deploy it as a weapon.

Why should someone, like myself, with strong sympathies for the Palestinian cause be 'anti-Semitic'? (most Palestinians speak Arabic). Why should someone who admires many of the alleged sayings of Jesus Christ be 'anti-Semitic' (he spoke Aramaic), On the other hand, I dislike a number of self-styled Jews who speak barely a word of Hebrew, Arabic - or any other Semitic language.

Jeff Blankfort, for instance, I regard as one of the unsung heroes of our times. I'm also impressed by the writings of Gilad Atzmon, Israel Shamir, Paul Eisen and Israel Shahak. I like the work – and the humanity – of artists such as Daniel Barenboim and Yehudi Menuhin. I could list more – a lot more – Jews for whom I have great respect.

I do not think you are anti-Semitic at all, though I disagree with your views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. However, I take issue with one of your "Jewish" heroes. On Israel Shamir; I find it doubtful that he is even Jewish (Israel Shamir isn't even his actual name). He actually believes that Jews ritually murder Christian children and he has been somewhat supportive of holocaust deniers. He has since been disowned by many pro-Palestinian activists, including Nigel Parry, who runs the electronic intifada site. See his page on Shamir here. Also see this wikipedia page on him. You might want to consider dropping him from your pantheon. Not exactly a character witness to anti-Semitism (which, I emphasize again, I do not accuse you of).

Also, Israel Shahak's books are filled with seriously distorted material on Orthodox Judaism, including flat-out lying. You may want to look into that.

Also, I do not know in what way, shape or form Chomsky could be construed as pro-Israel. I guess blaming the U.S. government for Israel's actions and not vice-versa will do that. I completely agree that he is a gatekeeper, though. I believe he has acted in this role specifically in regards to the conflicts in the Balkans (a different bag of worms) and the JFK assassination, as do many other "left-wing" writers.

Edited by Owen Parsons
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did various google searches and could find no other mention of Bloomfeild’s papers being held by the National Archives of Canada (let alone them not being released) so all we have is the word of a semi-literate anonymous blogger. You’d think if the story were true it would appear elsewhere on the Net. The author does not provide any citation or evidence that what he claims is true. You’d think if it were true he’d be able to provide a citation. We are not even told why supposedly the papers aren’t being released.

It took me all of 45 seconds or less. On your last statement - is that not the question.

http://mikan3.archives.ca/pam/public_mikan...1508290,1507392

Access Conditions

Graphic (photo) 90: Open

Textual records 18: Restricted by creator/donor

I confirmed the fact that these documents are still considered restricted with the Archives. No reason given.

- lee

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did various google searches and could find no other mention of Bloomfeild’s papers being held by the National Archives of Canada (let alone them not being released) so all we have is the word of a semi-literate anonymous blogger. You’d think if the story were true it would appear elsewhere on the Net. The author does not provide any citation or evidence that what he claims is true. You’d think if it were true he’d be able to provide a citation. We are not even told why supposedly the papers aren’t being released.

It is clear from his website that his name is Maurice Philipps. It is a travesty to say that he is semi-literate. In fact, considering it is his second language (he is French-Canadian), I think his English is excellent. I think you might get more support for your arguments if you did not resort to the discredited tactic of suggesting your opponents are racists. I know this is the traditional strategy of the Zionist movement but it has little impact on well-educated people.

Link to comment
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...