Jump to content
The Education Forum

Nathaniel Heidenheimer

Members
  • Posts

    1,216
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Nathaniel Heidenheimer

  1. ------ I think its great to write letters to the individuals, but in the end, this is not REAL pressure. Because it does not put MAKE THEIR CREDIBILITY the issue. When we go wide-angle and make the question of whether or not they are aiding censorship, on this first time in 50 years event.... I think this has way more eyebrow wave potential than we are realizing. Unless we make the media itself the issue there is no political cost for them. We have to MAKE that political cost by posting wide.
  2. 7 UNIQUE BREAKS FROM THE US COLD WAR CONSENSUS: WHY DO WE NEVER HEAR ABOUT THIS ON THE SO CALLED LEFT? BECAUSE THEN THE ASSASSINATION WOULD BE FREIGHTED WITH POLICY IMPLICATIONS, AND THE CORRECT AUDIENCE WOULD "GO THERE". Some people on the left have asked why I post so much about the JFK assassination. Aren't there more pressing issues now? etc. Well I have been watching US politics for a good while. Also watching changes on the so called left. (I say so-called left because there are only a few publications and they can have a vastly disproportionate effect, as Frances Saunders pointed out on her key book on CIA left-gatekeeping, The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and World Of Arts and Letters* ) What really stands out is that, over time, the left has become completely detatched from electoral politics. Hold on, I am not blaming the left for that. It makes sense, given that the Democrats have become More Bush than Bush Could Get Away with. But why has the left not done more to call the bluff of the Democrats? Why have there been no protests on the doorsteps of the Democratic Senators of high finance? Why instead are all efforts channeled into endless tributaries of social movements which make no claim whatsoever upon the broader body politic? Why, in a nutshell did Occupy Wall Street not point the finger at the Enabling Democrats? Why does The Nation or Common Dreams never ever publish protests at the doors of the party that has become, in effect , the cowcatcher of the Republican locomotive? What Now Dead Sen. Wellstone once called The Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party has been completely exterminated. But the history of HOW THE DEMOCRATS GOT THIS FAR RIGHT is almost non-existant on the Foundation Funded Left. The word Liberal is used on both Obama and RFK, JFK and FDR. This is ahistorical and more profoundly misleading than most people realize. Why, in short must so much of the Foundation Funded Left offer diversion rather than challenge to our competely corrupt public institutions and Democrats. It sure is a great way of taking pressure off our new Robber Barons. These Rober Barrons are now not even inconvenienced by real muckrakers, because the internet cannot provide critical mass large enough to matter in terms of real reform that can become law. Thus, so much of our Foundation Funded Left only leads the country, and because of the US' role as leading imperialist, the world, further right. In this context might it make sense to look at the last time politicians DID actually try swimming upstream, against the corporate money, and against the will of the dominant corporate institutions. Now we must be careful here. Because if these examples exist, we have to have the correct searching image. It is unlikely that we are going to find a socialist Senator or president in Cold War America. In fact a snowball has more chance in 2016. In other words the pol would not even be in the river to swim at all were he not essentially a capitalist and in agreement on with the consenses on many issues. But if we seek to determine how the US now has the greatest economic inequality than in any year since 1917, and if we seek to determine why and how the Democratic Party has become , in effect the cowcatcher on the Republican locomotive, a party that prevents opposition to right wing policies rather than defuses the opposition to those policies, we do have some explaining to do in terms of the party that once had a consistent record of lowering inequality rather than aiding and abetting it. In this context-- of the last President who tried swimming upstream, against the direction that major US capital was trending-- it is worth noting that there is no president in US history that receives more hostile coverage than JFK. The kitchen sink is regularly hurled. And what really stands out is that, on the real stuff, actual policies, the worst distortions over the last 20 years have been published by alleged left writers such as Noam Chomsky, Alexander Cockburn, Seymour Hersh, and these writers have all been syndicated and given lots of airtime on the so called "left" airwaves of Pacifica. The central claim of these writers is that JFK was "just another Cold Warrior", and that no major policy changes resulted from his assassination, so why bother even looking into his assassination. Given than 80% of academic historians writing since 2000 have concluded that the JFK Assassination was, indeed, a conspiracy, this allegation about JFK's policies is important in preventing the left from "going there." Anyone who reads any real history on the topic of the Cold War, however, soon reaches the conclusion that this is exactly where the left should be. For the assassination is not about the death of any one liberal. It actually shows what happened the last time a president tried swimming upsream. And nothing shows illuminates the institutional nature of power-- as opposed to the the view that decisions are based on human reason in a world with a free press--more than the JFK assassination and the strikingly abrupt policy changes that immediately ensued Bellow are 7 key examples of JFK's challenging the Foreign Policy consensus on 3rd World Nationalism. Why are readers of Foundation Funded Left publications so unfamiliar with them? For those familiar with US politics in the 1950's these statements stand out as truly unique. These examples are taken from the excellent new book by James DiEugenio called Destiny Betrayed: JFK Cuba, and The Garrison Case (2nd Edition)** I cannot recommend this book highly enough. However all of these observations can be cross-referecned with numberous other academic studeis. 1. "This is an area of human conflict between civilizations striving to be born and those desperately trying to retain what they have held for so long... the fires of nationalism so long dormant have been kindled and are now ablaze.... Here colonialism is not a topic fo tea-talk discussions; it is the daily fare for millions of men" -- Representative JFK upon returning from a fact finding trip to French Indochina, 1951 2. "It is worth noting here that Kennedy also took time to criticize his own State Department for what he thought was its lackidasical approach to the true issues in the area. He pointed out that too many of our diplomats spent too much time socializing with and then serving the short-term goals of our Ruropean allies instead of "trying to undersand the real hopes and desires of the people to which they are accredited." What makes that last remark ususual is that young Kennedy was criticizing both a Secratary of State and a sitting president from his own party -- Dean Acheson and Harry Truman. He then went even further and questioned the widom of the USA in allying itself with "the desperate effort of a French regime to hang on to the remnants of empire"-- Destiny Betrayed 2nd edition page 22. 3. "On July 1, 1953-- A year before the fall of the French empire in Vietnam-- Kennedy spoke on the floor of hte senate about why France would not win the war: "the war can never be won, unless the people are won from sullen neutrality and open hostility to support it. And they never can be, unless they are assured beyond a doubt that complete independence will be theirs... at the war's end" (29) The following year, Kennedy tried to explain that Ho Chi Minh and the Viet Minh were popular because they were seen as conducting an epic battle against French colonialism. Whether they were communists or not was not the point. For, in Vietnam, they were first seen as liberators." -- Desitny Betrayed 2nd edition, page 23. 4. Upon learning of the Dulles' proposal to use tactical nukes at Dien Bien Phu, "Senator Kennedy got wind of this... (and) he again took to the floor of the senate and had what was perhaps his first defining national moment. He wanted to know how 'the new Dulles policy and its dependence upon the threat of atomic realiation will fare in these areas of guerrilla warfare." Then, during the actual siege, he again took the floor and said, "To pour money , materieal, and men into the jungles of Indochina without at least a remote prosepect of victory would be dangerously futile.... No amount of American military assistance in Indochina can conquer an enemy of the people which has the sympathy and covert support of the people."(33)-- Destiny Betrayed, 2nd Edition, p. 23. 5. In 1956, Senator Kennedy attempted to make some speeches for hte campaign of Democratic presidential candidate Adlai Stevenson. By this time he hadseen that both parties were missing the opint about independence for the Third World. Kennedy was now even more convinced that the nationalistic yearning for independence was not to be so quickly linked to the 'international communist conspiracy.'(38) When Kennedy made some speeches for Stevenson, he used the opportunity to attack the Manichean world view of the Eisenhower-Dulles administration. But he also alluded to the fact that the Democrats were not that much better on the issue: The Afro-Asian revolution in nationalism, the revolt against colonialism, the deter-mination of people to control their national destinies... in my opinion the tragic failure of both Republican Democratic administrations since World War II to comprehend the nature of this revolution, and its potentialities for good and evil, has reaped a bitter harvest today-- and it is by rights and by necessity a major foreign policy campaign issue that has nothing to do with anti-Communism (39) Again, Kennedy was not playing political favorites. But the content of thei message was too much for even that liberal paragon Sevenson. His office now requested that Senator Kennedy make no further foreign policy comments associated with the candidate's campaign. (40)."-- (emphasis N. H.) Destiny Betrayed 2nd Edition. 6. Kennedy Attacks Eisenhower on Algeria "On July 2, 1957, Senator Kennedy rose to speak in the Senate chamger and delivered what the New York Times was to call the next day, "the most comprehensive and outspoken arraignment of Western policy toward Algeria yet presented by an American in public office" (42).. Kennedy assailed the administration, especially John Foster Dulles and Nixon, for not urging France into negotiations, and therefore not being its true friend. He began the speech by saying that the most powerful force in international affairs at the time was not the H-bomb, but the desire fo independence from imperialism. If not, America would lose the trust of millions in Asia and Africa. He then pointed out specific instances where the USA had aided the French effort there both militarily (through the use of weapons sales) and diplomatically (by voting to table the issue at the United Nations). He attacked both the administration and France for not seeing in Algeria a reprise of the 1954 Indochina crisis: Yet did we not learn in Indochina... that we might have served both the French and our own causes infinitely better had we taken a more firm stand much earlier than we did? Did that tragic episode not teach us that whether France like sit or not admits it or not, their overseas territories are sooner or later, one by one, inevitably going to break free and look with suspicion on the Western nations who impeded their steps to independence. (44) ... Eisenhower complained about "young men getting up and shouting about things." (48) John Foster Dulles pointed out that if the senator wanted to tilt against colonialism, perhaps he might concentrate on the communist variety(49) Jackie Kennedy was so angry with Acheson's disparaging remarks abou the speech that she berated him in public while they were waiting for a train at New York's Penn Central. (50) Kennedy's staff clipped newspaper and magazine responses ot the speech. OF 138 editorials, 90 were negative. Again Stevenson was one of Kennedy's critics. -- Destiny Betrayed 2nd edition, page 26 7. Kennedy now became the man to see for visiting African diplomats, especially those seeking from nations breaking free from the bonds of European colonialism. ... Rebuffed by Eisenhower (Patrice Lamumba, leader of Congo) now turned to the Russians for help in expelling the Belgians from Katanga. This sealed his fate inn the eyes of Eisnehower and Allen Dulles. The president now authorized a series of assassination plots by the CIA to kill Lumumba(57) These plots finally succeeded on January 17, 196a, three days before Kennedy was inaugurated. His first week in office, Kennedy requested a full review of the Eisenhower/Dulles policy in Congo. The American ambassador to that important African nation heard of this review and phoned Allen Dulles to alert him that President Kennedy was about to overturn previous policy there. (58) Kennedy did overturn this policy on February 2, 1961. Unlike Eisenhower and Allen Dulles, Kennedy announced he would begin full cooperation with Secretary General Dag Hammarskjold at the united Nations on this thorny issue in order to bring all the armies in that war-torn nation under control. He would also attempt to neutralize the country so there would be no East/West Cold War competition. Third, all political prisoners being held should be freed. Not knowing he was dead, this part was aimed at former prime minister Lubumba, who had been captured by his enemies. (There is evidence that, knowing Kennedy would favor Lumumba, Dulles had him klled before JFK was inaugurated. (59) Finally. Kennedy opposed the secession for the mineral-rich Katanga province. The secession fo Katanga was a move very much favored by the former colonizers, Belgium, and their British allies. Thus began Kennedy's nearly three year long struggle to see Congo not fall back under the claw of European Imperialism. This story is well captured by Richard Mahoney in his milestone book JFK: Ordeal in Africa. As we shall see, whatever Kennedy achieved there, and it was estimable, was lost when Lyndon Johsnon became president. Consider these pre-presidency track record on the question of JFK and decolonization. Is there any other Senator who made such strong statements against the dominant foreign policy consensus in the McCarthy Era? If you can find even one statement like these from another Senator, please let me know. Now consider that every single academic historian writing on Vietnam in the JFK-LBJ transition years since 1992 has concluded that there is no question that JFK would not have escalated to a major US land war. This was also the view of contemporary journalists. It was a myth largely developed after the publication of the key disinformation book The Best and The Brightest*** Moreover, the newer academic publications, with the benefit of the newly released declassified documents since Congress was pressured into passing the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) have shown that JFK was, in fact, getting out of Vietnam at the time of his assassination. This is an idea that was roundly ridiculed by Time, Newsweek and the New York Times at the time of the JFK movie in the early 90s. How funny that our so-called left has never taken note that all of the recent academic works have born out the pioneering work of University of Maryland History Professor John Newman. But then, when it comes to JFK, our Official "Leftists" (not really left IMO) have a predictable way of suddenly lining up with footnoteless Bill O'Reilly and the Paper of Record they love to hate on all the small, crunchy issues, that only a tiny percentage of the population could related to. Just so the hot house Foundation Funded Left serves to detatch social history from political history, convincing the young that it has always been the case. After Vietnam, look at JFK's policies v those of the CIA on Laos, Indonesia, the USSR, Brazil, and Cuba in 1963. Don't forget JFK v. CIA on Israel's attempt to bring nuclear weapons into the Middle East! By studying the last predent who tried to swim upsteam and what subsequently happened to his head one can learn a lot about the river, and its big media minders. One can also learn a lot about how a Fake Foundation Funded "left" (not really left) played a key role in making the today's left politically irrelevant. This knowledge offers lots of clues about how to fix this situation. *http://www.amazon.com/Cultural-Cold-War-World-Letters/dp/1565846648/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1362267671&sr=1-1&keywords=the+cultural+cold+war+the+cia+and+the+world+of+arts+and+letters **http://www.amazon.com/Destiny-Betrayed-Garrison-Second-Edition/dp/1620870568 ***http://www.amazon.com/JFK-Ordeal-Richard-D-Mahoney/dp/0195033418/ref=tmm_hrd_title_0
  3. The place, for the CIA and the rest of capitalism in 2013, is only on websites where people who have already read at least ten books about JFK go. That way the "contagion" --their term for truth-- will not spread. Unfortunately they are getting their wish. We have been given the best weapon we could have ever dreamed of-- the abject censoring of the RFK Jr. quote -- and as far as I can tell, almost nobody is posting it where the truth ain't. This censorship could really raise neo-hackles. Everything is on the internet. EXCEPT the first time Kennedys have publicly stated that they believed it was a CIA conspiracy. And that is NOT allowed, and moreover nearly every big news outlet in America is covering it up. THis is Exactly the media-assassination link that could raise a young eyebrow, because it screams they protest too much better than Shakespeare could have written it. And yet, how many know about this? How can momentum built if JFK researchers are the least evangelical species on earth? And you know the worst thing about it. Later when the 50th fizzles because it is framed just like billionaires want it framed, as an Alex Jones scream fest. lots of these same information-never-share-button people will be screaming the loudest "WHY DOESN'T ANYONE CARE"!!
  4. SO WHERE IS THE TRASNCRIPT???? IS IT out yet?? Are people posting around to big sites about the suppression of the transcript? If you do not, why on earth would they release it? If we only post to ourselves on the internet........ THEN THE 50TH WILL BE A GIGANTIC DISASTER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  5. Jesus is there any fake JFK show that cheese-brain is NOT hosting, narrating or murdoching?-
  6. Len I am wondering if you would agree that it is a silly notion if you saw the presentation that i saw at Schoenberg Center in Harlem in January. It was an extremely unusual presentation. Also we need to discuss this the events of 61-63 in much greater detail if we are to conclude anything at all regarding just how biased the article is. Will type more when I get time but right now i am using my limited time to SPREAD important aspects of US history OUTWARD, rather than waste a lot of time with someone intent on belittling the dead with opinions that are so very very widely spread anyway, by the billionaire's media. Len can you find the talk at Shoenberg on youtube or anywhere? It was mentioned in NYT and on WBAI by Hugh Hamilton. It was filmed. But I can't find it ANYWHERE. I can sure understand why the two historians involved would not want it be widely shown! And even more so the institutions that underwrote that disgrace to history, at least , if not our current profoundly domesticated academics.
  7. Len, your discourse is very typical of the vast oversimplification of both Blight--not an expert in this field by any means-- and recent drive by historians. It is not devoid of "facts". Stop pretending that you do not know that history can be incredibly distorted and still include "facts". Or are you writing with the goal of oversimplification? Lets put it like this... FOR STARTERS... Who was the President who wrote the Legislation that kissed the Jim Crow South goodbye for the Democratic Party that was lead, in the Legislative Branch, almost entirely by southerners? Also perhaps it is time we look at the events of June 11th 1963? That was not fine print internet babble. It was not an internet world. It was a president using something called a Bully Pulpit at a particular time, and IN RELATION to a social movement that was rapidly evolving, and also in relation to a new medium that was creating new opportunities for the Civil Rights movement to be seen by a lot more people. Today we see these images lumped together, 20/20. The mediation of these images was not nearly as widespread and constant as Len and the 19th Century historian conveniently assume. What Len insists is very simple, is actually much, much more complex. Surprise. { I will TRY to respond every six and half respnses of Lens' responses. Moreover, I think that the motive of Blight become much more clear when his god-awful presentation is seen. Fpr some strange reason it does not seem to be available on the internet. Nor does the so-called Second E.P. that the historians promised they would make available. I am still waiting for that blade... er paper cut to fall. Funny how JFK seems to represent the most open season ever for today's eternally vigilant.
  8. The intersection BETWEEN social movements and nominal political change is a between-world which has no scholars. It is the missing wedge of the grapefruit which must not be seen or understood. Otherwise we will see that it has been blasted out with bullets. e.g. The MLK and RFK assassinations and why it was absolutely necessary that these killing occur BEFORE the 1968 Democratic National Convention. So what will it be good academics? Political History OR Social History? Or. The Fact of a Doorframe.
  9. This terribly bold prediction is based on an experience I had attending a forum that was advertised on Pacifica Radio, The New York Times, and which I atended. It was on MLK JFK and involved the wrong Blight on both their houses. It was at Schoenberg Center for African American culture and was pure Bankers Trust. I am unsurprised that the crime against history that I witnessed that night is unavailable on youtube. Fingerprints like that cannot be left for ANYONE to parafin. What I witnessed that night is the best example of a very important, and much more far-reaching disinformation strategy aimed at the left and lef-liberals: the "haircut" of JFK's policies from JFK, so that the assassination does not SEEM to matter for the left. I will attempt to describe this event as objectively as possible when I am less flabbergasted at the niching of today's propaganda. For starters we might examine the WRONG BLIGHT's editorial in the NYT from February 2012. I predict we will see a lot more of this habeus haircutting corpus. Unfortunately. note the wording from Wrong Bights' editorial which the NYT so graciously awarded The Professor From Another Century.. "While he did issue an executive order banning discrimination in federal housing in November 1962, and introduced an omnibus civil rights bill a few months later, the demands of the second Emancipation Proclamation were not fulfilled until President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the 1964 Civil Rights Act." Interesting word choices Professor Wrong- Blight. http://www.nytimes.c...festo.html?_r=0
  10. I would like to recommend that everyone give a close reading to pages 21-33 of Destiny Betrayed 2nd edition. That is because there is something all too rare on those pages. It is a presentation of just WHY THE LEFT SHOULD BE LOUDEST ABOUT THE JFK ASSASSINATION and why far more ink an airwave has been spent on preventing the left from ever picking up that fumble, than has been spent on any other disinformation out there. Why do not as many realize this tremendous effort spent of preventing the CORRECT players from picking up the fumble? Because these publications are niche marketed toward small but very influential audiences, just like Frances Saunders says. But they are pricy and their impact bleeds full spectrum from the "left" and the net effect is to make JFK seem like "just another Cold Warrior so why bother, and that MURDERS MOMENTUM for all of us who want the truth about the JFK assassination known widely enough to matter. Jim is there any way I could get copies of pages 21-33 to post around by the publisher? If I could get these I can guarantee the payoff will be exponential. These sections are called 1951: KENNEDY, COLONIALISM, AND THE COLD WAR 1961: KENNEDY BREAKS WITH THE COLD WAR CONSENSUS
  11. "One wonders if the CIA had any influence over the way that the Alsop brothers reported the JFK assassination." I hereby nominate this sentence for the Academy Award: Most Understatement in a Question-Format
  12. IF THIS WAS NOT JOE ALSOP'S BEST PERFORMANCE THEN.... Somewhere in the University of Virginia Miller Center Recordings there is an incredible phone call involving LBJ, Joe Alsop and Wagoner Carr? (is this Carr on the line?.) It sounds like LBJ is all ears and only speaks at the end. You can really hear the Alsopian rudder work in this call, which is about how the federalism issue will be handled in the formation of the Warren Commission. Just listen to all the Joe Alsop calls they're a riot. SEE NOVEMBER 25TH Alsop to Carr while LBJ is all ears. "because the left won't believe the FBI and because the FBI doesn't write very well" This is full of Georgetown knee-slappers (ambiguity-of-knee abundant) There is allusion to the Friendly Knee editorial, and we should all now recall Friendly's OSS days around a dispersed campfire. http://millercenter....on/1963/11_1963 CAN ANYONE CONFIRM OR DENY THAT THIS IS CARR ON THE LINE?
  13. As I have typed before Colby apparently felt that Angleton and Claire Booth Lucy In Whose Sky may have been collaborating with each other round his back when Colby was ostensibly top Rome CIA dog. I think the year that was mentioned was 1956. My source for this is Prados' Lost Crusader, and it might be true. On the other hand there are so many different possibilities for the origins of the alleged Angleton-Colby dispute that hardly anyone would notice if a few more were added.
  14. By the way in raising awareness about the National Geographic Killing series ( an interesting propa-packaging job...) it is very important that we include the fact that MURDOCH purchased the National Geographic Channel. Murdoch is such an important word that the Old testement repeats it 3 times to suggest .... something real bad, even by OT standards, which is bad weather indeed. MURDOCH ! MURDOCH! MURDOCH! The reasons this is bad, is that, even though non-Murdoch media is just as bad now by playing good cop to Ruperts bad, a much greater percentage of the pop thinks Rupert is playing this game solitaire. To exploit that the Nat Geo Murdoch must be fastened like a harness.
  15. --- Will do Ian. Was wondering why suddenly all these females on my hotmail were suggesting we get together at Columbus Circle in 1956, in order to to discuss US foreign policy and the Caribbean.
  16. What an incredible contrast his Road to Dallas is with his book on JFK and Vietnam, American Tragedy. A strong case could be made for American Tragedy being the best book (and its a tough league now) contrasting JFK and LBJ's policies on Vietnam.
  17. Hi, I have opened a humble Judo Studio in Tennessee, right beside that Jar that was placed there by some poet emulating the style of Mr. 5 Martini-Lunch. No seriously folks.. There is a lot of bad media about to reign down on the skulls of the populace. Many are young and would otherwise become interested in the JFK assassination and the real story behind it-- that of the replacement of the permanent national Security State for elected officials as the makers of key decisions in US history. This Bad Media is designed to do one thing: piss on the kindling so that the flame of curiosity so that flames of curiosity do not catch. The powers that be know that once that second book is ever opened ... its all over. They seek to keep it closed. After all when was the last time you saw a show on PBS that was specifically designed to PREVENT FURTHER RESEARCH. As for me it was Oswald's Ghost, which elevated Queen Pricilla of the Sun Belt Desert and Mr. Aynesworth to the level of Dr. TJ Eckleberry's omniscience all without mentioning their ties to CIA. Well as you know the god awful Thommmmm Hartttmannn books are about to be wide screened by the Di Caprios. What if.... We took preliminary actions and posted this article from CTKA and or other pointing out just how bad this book really is. A lot of post on wider spectrum sites... IE not specifically JFK related sites, could create enough early circulation so that when the movie comes out .. more newbies will remember this article and post it around when the movie is getting lots of national publicity. The more early posts, the greater the multiplier effect later, when it matters. And remember the goal is new younger sets not people already in the know. The Di Caprios can prove either boon or bane. It's up to us. Or we can stay cloistered here preaching to choirs and help bury the significance of the political assassinations for a new generation. http://www.ctka.net/Dicaprio_Waldron.html
  18. Paul which ones? The DMN blog post did feature the exchange, but then dove into its effort to portray Douglass' book as Catholic theology. Which sites did mention the CIA? Local or national. I think this example of censorship is so great that it deserves some degree of quantitative analysis. I have only begun looking at the articles that censor the CIA out of the story. At one point I reached five in a row and ran out of time.
  19. Thanks Michael Hogan. This is one of the worst, but there is so much competition. Note that here, not only is the CIA completely omitted, but the Mob comment is forced into RFK's mouth when it originally came from the Yellow Rose of Dallas. This is emerging as one of the most blatant, and most systematic acts of censorship in twentieth century history. What is so apparent is that they think they can get away with this with impunity. That is the degree of impunity that the fragmentation caused by the internet has given these Corporate mega-liars. This is a huge story, that needs a way of getting told. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/jfk-killed-conspiring-mobsters-nephew-article-1.1238994
  20. Actually there is a chance that Paul could be correct. This censorship really MIGHT be one of our best opportunities. Stop and think of what we have here. * RFK's son saying what he said, and thus utterly destroying BEFORE POTENTIALLY EVERYONE (not us) what was one of the LNers major arguments .." well then why didn't RFK criticize the WC * The first time Kennedys with said this in a vast public forum. * The corporate media virtually unanimously keeping The Salamander, the Mob but removing the CIA from the story * The clear example of Rose pushing Mob in a loaded question that might have come from Leanardo's father at Apian Way (They Do it THEIR way), and hence the perfect segue to the perfect negative template that is Hollywood's 2013 ConUcopia of everything that did not happen in Dallas. * The best possible Truman Show caricature of Totalitarian government possible in that the CIA is being lifted out of permissible full spectrum culpability BY THE DECISIONS OF NEWSPAPER EDITORS AND OR THEIR UberSarnoffs. * Were you looking for a clearer Soviet airbrush moment, it is nearly impossible to find it! IF... If we recognize and resolve one very basic source of confusion that the still relatively new medium called the internet fosters and feeds: the confusion between A) what it is possible to know for specialists with what is more widely known to non-specialists and what is presented with entry-ramps of political context to (or not) to make it relevant for new readers (or not) Yes, We have known about this for a long time. So what. That is apples and the potential for THIS story to go really, really Full Spectrum is oranges. Two totally different media animals. So the potential is there. Some cutting and pasting now, could really make THIS story snowball in a way that IMO, many are overlooking. As far as what actions to take... yes I agree we should letter write to the mayor. But I think that the much stronger slingshot we yield against this corporate goliath is our ABILITY TO SHAME THEM. This example is really that clear. The censorship is so direct, and impossible to dismiss as arbitrary. What they have is there credibility. If we do not show them an ability to impact their credibility, there is NOTHING to prevent them from doing this every day of the year. This example of censorship is a unique weapon we have been given. Time to open fire. Full Spectrum.
  21. Reports of the Huffington Divorce remain vastly overstated. This classic left-gatekeeping site helps the right more than anything else by pouring water on the major powder kegs in exchange for hot-house exotica leftism that makes everyone want to punch them because they sound crunchy and talk funny. As expected, no CIA but yes Salamader in Ariana's Huffington hothouse Mcleftist site.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/12/assassination-of-jfk_n_2463184.html
  22. Not very surprisingly, this right wing site does not mention the RFK Jr. quote of the CIA either. Surprisingly, somewhat, it was very high up on the google ratings. Note how this site not only eliminates the CIA from the quote but also eliminates it from all US history. Does anyone know if this Breitbart site was bought by a vast media outlet? http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/12/RFK-Jr-Second-Gunman-Involved-In-JFK-Assassination
×
×
  • Create New...