Myra Bronstein

I'm looking for a book. It's reference here: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKbushG.htm "In fact, Prescot Bush is credited with creating the winning ticket of Eisenhower-Nixon in 1952.(Source: George Bush, F. Green, Hipocrene, 1988)." I can't find it at my library or Amazon... Is this it? http://www.amazon.com/George-Bush-Intimate...TF8&s=books Can anyone point me to the book? Is there another source for the information that Prescot Bush created the Eisenhower-Nixon ticket? Thanks.

Even if it were true, this must be a candidate for the title of Most Absurd Motive Ever Offered for the Assassination, considering that it was a well-known fact that Joseph Kennedy suffered a serious stroke in early 1962, and was ever after unable to communicate by telephone with anyone. Credit Seymour M Hersh in the Dark Side of Camelot. Yeah...about that. I'm trying to decide what's up with Sy. Did he do the hatchet job on President Kennedy for the obvious, CIAesque, reason? He's released some truly good info over the years, thanks to his, uh, access to certain kinds of whistle-blowers. And I've seen him give a speech where he talked about Abu Ghraib torture of kids, which he reported to the embarassment of the regime, and he was damn near crying. I'm having some trouble believing he's a total hack. But... that hatchet job on President Kennedy--what's up with that?

Please don't feed the trolls. Ashton Well, good line Ashton. But what exactly are you saying? 1) You were responding to a rhetorical question asked to me, simply for effect, by a person who knows well that I don't respond to his asinine trolling at all. 2) If I ever want to say you are "a CIA apologist," you won't have to ask anybody else whether I did or not. Trust me. 3) You were asking the resident CIA apologist, who by his rhetorical question, of course, was making the case that he is not. On that subject, here is just one quote of note (and you can do any more research on this point yourself if you choose): It just warms my heart. How about yours? Ashton Oh, sorry Ashton. I read too much into the context. Thanks for clarifying. >"Having recently read McCloy's HSCA testimony, along with much of the Executive Session testimony, >I must admit I now believe that McCloy and Dulles were both committed patriots trying to do a good job." "It just warms my heart. How about yours? Ashton" Oh... Oh dear. Oh good lord. Ok, so back to Eisenhower, I feel that he may not have been above taking a few favors, like those John described (and needless to say Johnson was a lying thug), and letting the spooks go way too far. But he didn't grasp the true scope and depths of the evil he was dealing with in terms of Nixon, Dulles brothers, CIA, Prescott Bush, etc. And the U-2 episode was the eye-opener, but it was too late. Anyone agree, disagree?

Thank you!!!

Please don't feed the trolls. Ashton Well, good line Ashton. But what exactly are you saying?

Maybe this is a quibble, but Dr. King broadened his scope to encompass human rights. He wasn't just a spokesman for one segment of society. In fact I believe his expanded focus in his later year(s)--to include opposition to the Vietnam war, much like JFK...--is what cost him his life. Along with his outspoken support of the unsightly poor. I'd like to see this forum title changed to reflect his true focus on all disenfranchised people. I really think he earned it. And the corporate powers that be would prefer that we see him in the more limited capacity of a civil rights hero. He was that but he was more. Thank you.

Careful, now; I fear you may be drifting somewhat toward the Ashton direction. Better furl the jib and trim the sheets. Oh, dear me. I'm a bit surprised myself to see you have "read quite a few" of my posts, then have elected to make an issue of a mere opinion I expressed concerning a very smoky opinion issued by H.R. Haldeman years after the fact—and have done so to the complete exclusion of a mini-encyclopedia of exhaustively researched solid and incontrovertible facts that I have posted. With all due respect, from where I sit this is somewhat on the order of razing the cornfield to find a weed. Glad to hear that...Mr. Gray. I will read more of your writings on the subject of Watergate. It's critical to establish what that was all about in order to turn on the light for 'Merkans in general. Thanks for the URL; I'll read it much more thoroughly. The administrators thoughtfully have provided a search function and quoting capabilities. The use of them in tandem will completely obviate the possibility of such misrepresentation. Perhaps you would be kind enough to use them and quote what you're referring to in some semblance of context. Well, now, I sure never said a cigar is just a cigar. Monica Lewinsky settled that question once and for all. Pleasure to make your acquaintance. Likewise fer sure. I'm much less flowery in my prose. Hope that's not offputting for an articulate gentleman such as yourself.

Thanks very much Dawn. Wonder if the SDS was Operation CHAOSed. Wasn't that Johnson's baby? Friggen thug.

Even if it were true, this must be a candidate for the title of Most Absurd Motive Ever Offered for the Assassination, considering that it was a well-known fact that Joseph Kennedy suffered a serious stroke in early 1962, and was ever after unable to communicate by telephone with anyone. Hell, it was when Poppy Kennedy had his stroke that the bad guys lost any supposed control over President Kennedy and he really blossomed into a great president. He totally had his own mind, and that is why he was murdered.

They like to appeal to the best qualities in humankind to bring out the worst qualities in society, for their own financial gain of course.

Huh? Is Ashton saying I'm a CIA apologist? Oh yeah, I heart the CIA. Pat, I'm convinced that Prescott was part of the American Liberty League behind the 1933 coup attempt, but I'm looking for the same evidence you are. Smedley Butler supposedly listed the people involved, and I can't find Prescott in the lists. As far as I know John Buchanan has done the most pointed reporting on it. I really don't know how credible he is but I think he helped find docs confirming the Prescott/Nazi link. Here's some stuff mentioning the 1933 caper (same year as the Reichstag fire?...) and Prescott: http://www.spitfirelist.com/f481.html "Among the most substantively interesting of John’s recent discoveries is the fact that Prescott Bush was an early financier of the Liberty League, a domestic fascist organization that was the primary element in the 1934 fascist plot to overthrow President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. (For more about the 1934 coup attempt, see—among other programs—FTR#’s 448, 475.)" If he really proved that link, with Prescott financially supporting the American Liberty League, that's huge. Among his info is this video on youtube. He is very specific about Prescott's role in the attempted overthow of FDR here: http://youtube.com/watch?v=MTzfi7SJ-Kk He says he has testimony from the McCormack-Dickstein committee about the ALL's plans for a hitler style fascism after they killed FDR. If we can find that testimony, or proof of Prescott's funding of the ALL...oh yeah. I'll keep looking. I'm adding "McCormack-Dickstein " to my search strings on the subject. How do you feel about Rense? I'm really asking. They have lots of good info but I don't know about their credibility. Anyway, there's this: http://www.rense.com/general66/butler.htm Well this isn't much but I'm still looking. If you find better evidence please let me know. Pat, can I get your input on the rest of my Eisenhower premise? I ask since you seem to share my opinion the Eisenhower was a fundementally decent guy who fell in with a bad crowd and well...oops. But I'd really like input from anyone/everyone (almost ) on my summary.

I work for myself. In fact, I am a fairly successful capitalist. My income comes from the advertising that appears on my website. My sponsors therefore are often the corporations that I am attacking. Isn’t the web wonderful? What are my motivations? This is what appeared in the Times yesterday: “Governments perpetually try to keep secrets from the public” says John Simkin. They call it national security but in reality, it’s an attempt to cover up illegal or immoral activities. I’m just being an active citizen. I don’t like being misled and the Kennedy assassination is an incredible case of the public being misled.” Yes I am biased (subjective) in my comments. We all are. So are you, although you hide behind the label of “patriotic American” you are probably a right-wing Republican. Anyway, that does not matter, as long as you can logical argue your case. Nor am I anti-American. I am just against corruption. See for example my thread on the corruption of Tony Blair. Therefore, what did I get wrong about Eisenhower’s dealings with the oil industry? If I didn’t get anything wrong, why are you not concerned about corrupt politicians and businessmen? The large number of Americans on the forum are concerned about this corruption. They are the real patriotic Americans. Furthermore Americans need the European perspective. We don't get real news here, especially about the Kennedy assinationS and government lies. So we have to import real news. Thanks again to the CIA and their very successful Operation Mockingbird. You need to learn real history Richard. That's ok, we all do. Just don't expect it from the mainstream media or official approved packaged homogenized history books.

Hee hee! It already went to court. The jury decided that the CIA did in fact murder President Kennedy. E. Howard Hunt Vs. The Liberty Lobby was the case name, Mark Lane was the winning attorney and he wrote a book about it called "Plausible Denial." Why are you demanding proof that's already been provided? Sounds like you just aren't willing to find or acknowledge the truth, even though it's easy to find on the web.

This forum is also about connecting dots Richard. The dots go back at least to 1933-FDR's presidency, when nazi Prescott Bush (father of one of JFK's murderers), and his American Liberty League, tried to murder FDR and wage a military coup (thwarted by Marine General Smedley D. Butler--genuine 'mercan hero) to oust the US government. The Bushes have been waging war on elected presidents, committing treason, and stealing elections ever since. There is not one presidency since FDR's that has not been contaminated by the Bush Crime Family and the Dulles brother's CIA. The events of Nov 22, 1963--when they finally succeeded in a coup--created the situation we are currently in wherein yet another Bush is having their fascist way with the world. I personally am much more interested in the big picture than in which cowardly thug hid behind a...bush...to wack President Kennedy (what you presumably consider "sticking to the point"). I want to know who was in the ruling class was that hired the shooters. Nov 22, 1963 did not happen in a vacuum. This is a huge consipiracy and cover-up spanning decades. If you dont or wont see that I wonder what you'd get out of this forum.

This is excellent info John. Thank you! So Eisenhower had a diary eh? That's significant. Ok, so the timing of this post is excellent. I'm researching the Nixon/(Eisenhower) era. If I had to summarize it briefly I'd say: Eisenhower was a relatively decent fellow (more so than Truman). But he was sick a lot with at least one serious heart attack (presumably not CIA induced...?...Did Ike have heart trouble before his "presidency"?) and strokes (?). And he was a tad lazy and preferred a game of golf with Senator Prescott Bush to presidential biz. He also trusted the wrong people. Prescott Bush convinced him to run for president (I haven't found solid sources for this though--anyone know of some?) and got Nixon in the VP slot. The Eisenhower "presidency" was actually a co-presidency between "VP" Nixon (with Prescott pulling the strings for the CIA), and Sect of State John Foster Dulles dictating foreign policy (with brother Allen pulling more strings for the CIA). However, Eisenhower was aware and complicit enough to approve the CIA crimes in Guatamala and Iran etc. Once the CIA poisoned his overt foreign policy by sabatoging the U-2 spy plane and letting Eisenhower make a fool of himself denying it to Khrushchev and the world, Eisenhower realized he'd created Frankenstein's monster and left office with his military-industrial-complex warning speech to the nation. Good luck Mr. Kennedy; you try to clean up the impossible lethal mess Truman and I left you. Any additions/subtractions to/from the thumbnail summary?

The "Whitewater fiasco" amounted to nothing. Zero, zilch. It was one of the many Scaife funded attacks on Clinton (Ref "The Hunting of the President"). After years of harrassment it became obvious that it was a small land deal that the Clintons lost money on. In addition it occured prior to Clinton's presidency.

I can try criticizing his remarks in one of the old threads. That should flush him out.

Dammit! Are they rerunning it? (I'll check.) Feel free to post VCR/Tivo alerts for special pertinant programs everyone... Thanks for the summary. Sounds like it's part of the official mythology.

Of course he did. I'm surprised he didn't insist on exhuming President Kennedy's casket and displaying it--like a hunting trophy--in HIS library. He probably figured there was no body there so why bother. Anyway, I doubt Johnson said too much that's incriminating since he knew he was on tape, though there must be a reason that 13% of the tapes have been withheld. But I'd love to know if there's any evidence of his blackmailing tactics in any context on the tapes. I assume he saved that strategy for in person discussions.

The ultimate Iran-y, of course, was that Reagan ordered the invasion of Grenada to cover his retreat from Lebanon. I'd been skeptical that the move into Grenada was so calculated until reading Maggie Thatcher's memoirs. She claimed that Reagan invaded Grenada, a British protectorate, without even discussing it with her, and that the U.S. invasion was unnecessary. ************************************************************ "The ultimate Iran-y, of course, was that Reagan ordered the invasion of Grenada to cover his retreat from Lebanon." I was absolutely appalled when that ridiculous fiasco was going down! They carried on as if it were Pearl Harbor or something, those damned arm chair warriors! How embarrassing to have to claim to be an American after witnessing that total display of ineptitude. Grenada was about as threatening to the sovereignty of the United States as Jamaica, or Bermuda, or Nassau and the Bahamas, for chrissakes! Is that all the Reagan/Regan regime could muster up was to go and invade a resort town? Or, maybe the "Resorts International" front was somehow at risk, or in danger of losing most of its clientel from the in-coming spring-break cruise lines, what with the bad PR being aired on the newswires and all? What a bunch of worthless yahoos! ___________________________ Ha. There was a priceless New Yorker cartoon that showed an overblown General, presumably at home with spouse, in full uniform with a gazillion medals, holding a drink and posturing. His wife says to him: "you're insufferable after a 'big win.' Anyway, I realize that a heard melody is sweeter. But the Greneda thing was done to obfuscate matters involving the execution of some Castro associates, including someone named Maurice Bishop (no relation). Two birds, one stone; as usual. Thank you, Michael. I guess I really get pissed off by things that inadvertently equate me [as an American citizen] with asinine gov. strategies deployed in my name [as an American citizen], and with my tax dollars. Especially, when these strategies appear to me [as an American citizen] to be a complete exercise in banality, a comedy of errors, and a total embarrassment due to the waste of resources which could have been put to better use on projects here at home. ______________________ "Once again, Terry masters the art of understatement. I do admire her passion in every one of her posts. "________________________ What the heck...I'd probably admire her passion without the posts (you can tell it's a Friday). JG ******************************************************** "But the Greneda thing was done to obfuscate matters involving the execution of some Castro associates, including someone named Maurice Bishop (no relation). Two birds, one stone; as usual." Yeah, there they go with those damned "cut-outs" of theirs, again. Smoke and mirrors. Now you see 'em, now you don't. Masters of deception, as well as the masters of invention of "identity theft," as the term has been coined. There always seems to be a "double" popping up somewhere for the seemingly expressed purpose of "You can't put the blame on Mame, here." We've got 2 John Hulls [F. or L., take your pick], we've got 2 Maurice Bishops [well, how convenient!], and let's see, now who else can I think of... Just thought I throw this in for posterity. I believe the last verse is apropo: You Can't Always Get What You Want Lyrics by Rolling Stones [verse] I saw her today at a reception A glass of wine in her hand I knew she would meet her connection At her feet was her footloose man [chorus] No, you can't always get what you want You can't always get what you want You can't always get what you want And if you try sometime you find You get what you need Yeah, baby [verse] And I went down to the demonstration To get my fair share of abuse Singing, "We're gonna vent our frustration If we don't we're gonna blow a 50-amp fuse" Sing it to me now... [chorus] You can't always get what you want You can't always get what you want You can't always get what you want But if you try sometimes well you just might find You get what you need Oh baby, yeah, yeah! [verse] I went down to the Chelsea drugstore To get your prescription filled I was standing in line with Mr. Jimmy And man, did he look pretty ill We decided that we would have a soda My favorite flavor, cherry red I sung my song to Mr. Jimmy Yeah, and he said one word to me, and that was "dead" I said to him [chorus] You can't always get what you want, no! You can't always get what you want (tell ya baby) You can't always get what you want (no) But if you try sometimes you just might find You get what you need Oh yes! Truly. You get what you need--yeah, baby! [verse] I saw her today at the reception In her glass was a bleeding man She was practiced at the art of deception Well I could tell by her blood-stained hands [chorus] You can't always get what you want You can't always get what you want You can't always get what you want But if you try sometimes you just might find You just might find You get what you need [repeat chorus] Lyrics! I love lyrics. And the rolling stones are an appropriate choice given their role in the drowning murder of Brian Jones.

Reprise... I think this forum is dedicated to getting justice for these men. Even Lincoln in fact. Does anyone else think that he was murdered because he--like President Kennedy--wanted to start printing money (per the constitution) and stop the federal reserve from making interest off the US gov't?

No, I do not think it is possible that JFK and the CIA were working with Che and Juan Almeida against Castro. The authors must have been smoking something! Well, I frankly have a lot of problems with the premise of the book. And with the claim that the CIA was duped.... Anyway, I've asked the same question twice with no reply. Here it is again: I just read "Ultimate Sacrifice" and have a question for Mr. Waldron. If the Kennedys were close to overthrowing Castro, why wouldn't the mafia wait until Castro was out of power to kill JFK? Wouldn't they want to get their casinos and property back after capitalism is, presumably, restored -- *before* assassinating their enemy? Thank you. Myra Is Mr. Waldron still going to answer our questions?

Carl Bernstein, CIA and the Media, Rolling Stone Magazine (20th October, 1977) ... Woo hoo it worked again! Thank you John. Very useful article.

...I'll see if I can find a bonafide source for that dubious quote I posted. (If I can't then maybe you can just post it and claim that "truthiness" is on your side. You know, from the gut.) This page lists the source as Colby being quoted by Dave McGowan in Derailing Democracy: http://mtracy9.tripod.com/cia_media.htm Ashton Woo hoo! Procrastination paid. Someone else went and did the work. Thanks Ashton. Another good quote there: ""You could get a journalist cheaper than a good call girl, for a couple hundred dollars a month." --CIA operative, discussing the availability and prices of journalists willing to peddle CIA propaganda and cover stories. Katherine the Great, by Deborah Davis" Ain't that the truth. Wonder whatever happened to the Media Whores Online website. It was a good one. Wow now I really want to find that entire article: "The CIA & The Media" from Rolling Stone, 10/20/77. Oh yeah, very good. And the NY Times...well they really walk that walk; don't just talk the talk. Sleazeballs.

I already have a page on Colby. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/SScolby.htm However, I would like to add the quote to it. Do you know when and where he said it? Well for "synergy" on general propaganda subjects, this page has a good overview John. http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com...gory:Propaganda I'm guessing you know about it since you're referenced on the Operation Mockingbird page: http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com...n_MockingbirdOf Of course Wiki has one too (they tend to be sort of right wing on specific people, but good for general reference): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda I'll see if I can find a bonafide source for that dubious quote I posted. (If I can't then maybe you can just post it and claim that "truthiness" is on your side. You know, from the gut.)