Paul Brancato

Also Lance - if I might, (if you prefer we can take this discussion to another place) I didn't read the whole book that Newman wrote about Jesus and early Christianity. I read some though. It's weird for you to diss Newman because you think he was out in left field on Christian history. I have read a lot about that history, as I'm pretty sure you have. Surely we could agree on one thing - that the church, meaning the Catholic Church, has a view of its own history that has been honed over the centuries, starting in the 2nd century with the dismissal of so called Gnostics as full of hubris and not representative of the true church. Did you by any chance buy that argument? If you did, of course you will not appreciate where Newman, and other alternative views of Christian history, are coming from. But just think for a minute about one word - hubris - and remember that the movement that lies, nearly forgotten, at the base of Christianity, was a revolutionary Jewish movement, in which the concept of hubris would have no place whatsoever. It's absurd on its face to believe the early 'fathers' of Catholicism on this point. Gnostic churches were refreshingly varied in their approaches. Women often had rights of priesthood for instance. Heirarchy had no place in their concepts. Newman, and others, have examined this early history and see a power grab. History, I would say, has proven them right.

I'm thinking the same thing.

George and John - methinks you are reading the wrong books. RFK and Lawford killed MM? Judyth Baker? Have either of you read any of the great books by Larry Hancock, or James DiEugenio, both active posters here?

Please run my quote accurately

, comcast removed MSNBC - that's bleeping insidious. i think for everyone's sake, in the world, our government, elected and not elected, needs to take the presidency away from Trump. Does anyone think Pence could be more dangerous? I don't think Pence knows the words to the Star Spangled Banner, while Trump has to beat on his chest with his hand in order to follow it. I'll take the former.

You have to wonder who was in that crowd. How could any serious person cheer when he starts bragging during such a serious event and in these dangerous times?

You demean yourself by referring to those that disagree with you CIA did it CT's, and calling their ideas fantasy, or their lack of 'proof' a failure on their part. You just keep repeating your insults and faulty logic for some bizarre reasons.

Steve - in the thread on Whitmeyer which I'm sure you've read, there is a short bio. Importantly in my opinion, Whitmeyer served in Germany until 1961. Considering the others who did likewise, like William Harvey and Theodore Shackley, it's no wonder that Mae Brussell mentioned him in her treatise on the Nazi connection. According to Daniel Sheehan, Shackley was Reinhardt Gehlen's translator. And of course, Crichton was close to George Bush. There's that interesting connection to DeMohrenschildt in Haiti. In the book Our Man in Haiti there is a reference to Thomas Devine and someone unnamed, probably George Bush, meeting with DeMohrenschildt. And then there is the reference to Whitmeyer being an assistant to J Walton Moore, the CIA guy that DeMohrenschildt claimed asked him to befriend Oswald. I'm wandering a bit I know.

Paul Trejo - blah blah blah. A work of fiction from a CIA master propagandist.

This was simply misdirection on your part. Oswald's ties to Phillips demonstrate his ties to US Intel, something you keep trying to wriggle out of.

Of course you are aware that Hoover's empty words belie his endless persecution of the left, and of Civil rights leaders like MLK. And please don't misquote me. What I said was that there was far less distance between the radical right and your heroes Dulles and Hoover than you think. And I'm not hiding anything about my past or influences.

Steve - while I have nothing to add to your attempts to shine some light on this mysterious 488th, I am encouraged that you are trying to figure this out. For years I've wondered about this unit, since both Whitmeyer and especially Crichton are persons of great interest. As you probably know, Crichton was named, along with George Bush, as private funders of Operation 40 by Coban Intel chief Escalante. Have you looked at the Spartacus entry for Crichton? I take this link to Operation 40 seriously, if for no other reason than the decades of close relations between Bush and these anti-Castro operatives. My attention to this stems from researching the Iran-Contra affair, and seeing Felix Rodriguez testify to Congress while wearing Che Guevara's watch. Crichton's role in the Continuity of Government operations in Dallas is under researched. If I'm not mistaken, it was Peter Dale Scott who mentioned the 488th prominently, and Mae Brussell referenced it too, whatever one thinks of her research.

Nuance ? How dare you? Marxist? What a limited, lines in the sand black and white world you live in. Nuance is something you have no clue about. To you left means Marxist. Wow. Grow up.

paul T what a dishonest response. I'm not going to bother looking through your umpteen posts, but you know what you said - That Hoover and Dulles were heroes who made a conscious choice not to uncover the conspiracy they knew existed because they wanted to prevent a 'civil war' with the far right, Edwin Walker and company. So I'll ask again - does the Trump victory and the resurgence of the far right give you pause? And cut the crap about lefties and our inability to see clearly, or our unwillingness to see JFK as he was. You clearly don't know who he was, and are too blinded by your own ideology to read his words and see him as Progressive. You are just joining ranks with the revisionists who don't want us to remember. Which always leads me to the big question - why are you even here? Why do you care?

I would tend to agree. I like Ron Reagan's characterization of Trump's inability (this goes for Rex Tillerson as well) to say anything bad about Putin as a 'tell'.

MEO(W)

Paul T. - it positions Oswald as a CIA asset, someone who was actively working with CIA, not with the radical right. Of course, I don't see the huge divide between CIA and radical right that you do.

Jim - not a day passes when I don't wonder what kind of world we would be living in had they all lived.

Paul T - While you engage with DVP, who it seems has not seen your theory here before, perhaps you could answer a question that's been on my mind. As a preface, you have stated numerous times that the reason WC/FBI covered up the truth and did not go after Walker and the radical right was in order to prevent civil conflict. Of course you know I find this ridiculous. But considering for a moment that you are right, and that, in your words, Hoover and Dulles were heroes who made the wise decision not to go after the perpetrators because they thought that a bloody internal conflict would ensue, would today's extreme rightward move make you rethink the wisdom of Hoover, Dulles, et al's decision? Has this question occurred to you before now?

Jim - Thanks for always setting the record straight. I experienced it personally a few years ago when you corrected me here when I expressed my opinion that Mary Pinchot and LSD changed JFK (it may have anyway, but he was already the progressive you consistently show him to be). Every MLK day I tune in to KPFA. The station has a remarkable and deep archive from which they draw on days like this. Today was no exception. I heard a speech delivered in Hollywood a few weeks before he was murdered, in which he makes clear that racism and poverty were inseparable, and that the Vietnam War was an evil that needed to be brought to an end. He articulated his plan to bring his movement to DC for at least 60 days to bring the the nation's and the world's attention to these truths. As always, I am brought to tears at some point when I listen to him. What a difference between his deep soulful words and by contrast the high sounding but somewhat empty rhetoric of President Obama. What does the 'audacity of hope' mean anyway? Why the cheers? I'll give Obama his due, but just saying... i was fortunate indeed that my parents brought be to DC for the 1963 march. It changed me forever.

It's not a video. And Veciana has made it perfectly clear, publicly, that Bishop was Phillips, and that he saw Phillips and Oswald together. I think the author should just publish his experience the normal way.

Doug - what do you make of the final image of the film?

Lance - I might be the only person here besides you who owns that book. I too did a lot of research into UFO phenomena, and like you found the author to be beyond the pale. I worked on UFO trading cards, but you won't find my name on the box because my ex wife wanted to finish the product herself, which she did. I am not a doubter that something real is happening, but I don't pretend to know what is happening. My inclination is that they are of this earth. I am reminded of the X-Files episode where Mulder and Scully are observing an abduction when suddenly another, far taller 'alien' appears and the two grays react in total surprise and are heard speaking English. Another episode finds Mulder in a far away jail cell, and in the adjoining cell a gray sits smoking a cigarette. Doig - with all due respect that video is way out there. Yes I watched the whole thing out of curiosity. I agree with David on this one.

What is this crap doing on this website?

Trump may be forced to choose between his business empire and the presidency. I think he would choose the latter in that case. Has anyone read the so called dossier that Buzzfeed published? I tried to post it but couldn't figure out how. There may be planted falsehoods in it designed to discredit the whole, but my bet is that much of it is true. The 'Golden shower' seems far fetched. Ron Reagan said that Trump's inability to say anything bad about Putin is a 'tell'. Love that choice of word.