Paul Brancato

Michael - the word list was a typo. I did tell you that you were not the target. You have self identified as a target. You used the phrase 'gambit refused'. All I did was ask you where you got your news. You're being defensive and taking this personally.

 I agree with the most recent point of view you expressed, which is that the murder of JFK changed the course of our history in completely negative ways.

So, who is rolling their eyes when you say that? Your friends, or someone here?

towards something I posted which did not reference you at all. If you are  

Yes - I should have asked where you get your information. I too use the web, very cautiously these days, with as much fact checking as I can.

Michael - I want to be clear my list wasn't aimed at you. Since you responded I engaged. How long have you been interested in the JFK assassination? What have you read about it?

Not a chess game Michael. We are all here with real names and to me that means verifiable points of view. You claim you have too much time on your hands these days and are posting a lot because of that. You are as far as I can tell a new member, post election I think - not double checking on that. If you're reading Breitbart or other news sources that I would view as fake or overly biased, I'd like to know so that I can put your posts in context. I have nothing to hide in this regard, you can ask me anything. Your posts have been confusing - that's why I asked. You are of course entitled to your own points of view about the world, but a forum like this is trying to determine facts. Yes, opinions abound and sometimes masquerade as facts. But I sincerely want to know what happened on Nov 22, 1963, and with some help from long time students and writers here, and my own voluminous reading, I've learned a lot. And I really care. There isn't a day that goes by where I don't mourn the events of the '60's.

Michael - what do you read for information? 

I don't disagree with criticism of msm in the past. Not at all. But they are finally stepping up now, print and tv.

I'm not going to bother to name names. I am going to say flat out that the assassination debate here is losing its focus. I could post my objections on some other thread, but I just can't resist putting them up front. No lefties here are licking their wounds. I am not waiting for, or needing, this president to get involved with the document release scheduled this year in order to know for sure why JFK, MLK, RFK were murdered. Any Trumpers posting here who have not at least become disillusioned already, weeks into Trump's presidency, cannot have anything interesting to say about our history. They are ignorant. 

Lets hear what you have to say about Steve Bannon being appointed to the NSC. How many of you think this is some kind of necessary house cleaning? You don't drain the swamp by inundating it with the biggest alligators around. If you support Bannon, or Muslim banning, you are a racist, pure and simple. And you need to read up on the Weimar Republic.

That's funny Lance.

I smell a big fat stinking rat. Does anyone reading this know where one can find Kilgallen's columns? I don't recall Marcello being mentioned before Shaw's book as a suspect in her murder. I was not aware that there were extant notes of the book she was apparently working on. Anyone know differently? 

Do you think Tillerson is Mormon?

Trump will not be helping shed light on our nefarious past any time soon, and he knows nothing.

Your definitions of lunatic fringe and mainstream are your own fantasy.

Ron - come on man. 

Michael - so you're not a Trump supporter. Glad to hear it. But you are dreaming. 

And Lance, bear in mind also that it is Paul that is the real father of this heirarchal male dominated Christian movement. And the guy never met Jesus. I suggest you read up on Paul in some of the alternative writings. If you want, I'll suggest some reading material. 

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. 

9 hours ago, David Andrews said:

Watch the market crash again.

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.