Kirk Gallaway

You're being sloppy. Are you saying that all bad MSM coverage is result of Operation Mockingbird? So in your mind CIA and MSM are synoymous? Let's take one of the most egregious examples of terrible MSM coverage actually affecting an election. Tell me W. Was the MSM coverage of Hillary's emails and throughout the 2016 election and Comey''s trashing of Hilary with Anthony Weiner's laptop in the last week before the election an example of Operation Mockingbird and the" Deep State" wanting Trump to win? W. I said "this century." So you have to go back 60 years? You're illustrating my point. Nobody here on a JFKA forum would contest that there was a CIA coverup in the 60's and decades after.

Funny Doug!, I didn't see Pee Wee there at first.

I agree with Cliff on this W. You are the foremost proponent of Operation Mockingbird currently being an active force dissuading people from belief in in a JKA conspiracy and mention it the most frequently here. I don't think that's the cause at all. I'd go even further W. How many college grads in the U.S. understand the pervasive, powerful influence of CIA propaganda in the mainstream media -- including prestigious newspapers like NYT and WaPo-- since the 1940s? Do you mean college graduates now? We shouldn't be surprised that younger people are more concerned about their current lives now than some major incident 60 years ago. I think that's the reason that there's waning interest , though I'd like to see those polls extended to right now in 2023.. I don't think these influences you keep mentioning NYT, Wapo are really near the shaping force they once were due to the advent of social media. I know this sounds like heresy, and I'm not saying it's not happening but let's be thorough. Give me some concrete examples of how the CIA has influenced their thinking about the JFKA this century. Even if you can't cite one concrete example. Do you really think there's any danger that these students are unaware? I bet if they also couldn't recite any concrete examples of CIA influence in their lives in general, there would still be few who might give you stupid, outrageous examples of CIA influence that they got from social media. The student teaching the teacher? heh heh a joke.

I got this NYT opinion letter from Nancy Pelosi about the Nixon/ Kissinger attempts to overthrow the democratically elected Allende in Chile. Apparently she's been behind the efforts to expose these records and she cites this NYT 50 year anniversary article, which is quite good. Allende was not a radical socialist. What riled Nixon and Kissinger was the fact that Allende wanted to nationalize Chile's copper industry, as Chile had among the biggest copper reserves in the world. Curiously the same situation is happening today in Chile over a valuable new 21st century commodity. Lithium being used in electric vehicle batteries. Chile has now moved to nationalize it's lithium industry, but it looks like it will happen this time. I don't know if you guys ever saw the movie "Missing" with Jack Lemon, Sissy Spacek and John Shea, but it was about this. First the Pelosi opinion. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/18/opinion/letters/nancy-pelosi-chile-coup.html?campaign_id=39&emc=edit_ty_20230919&instance_id=103103&nl=opinion-today&regi_id=61798350&segment_id=145128&te=1&user_id=48552702f942aacb0810b9de5ca41c55 Now the NYT article. 50 Years Ago, a Bloody Coup Ended Democracy in Chile Gen. Augusto Pinochet led the violent overthrow of the socialist government of Salvador Allende, seizing power for nearly 17 years. Here is a selection of photographs from the coup and its aftermath. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/11/world/americas/chile-coup-50-anniversary.html?searchResultPosition=1 Chilean Army troops firing on the La Moneda Palace in Santiago on Sept. 11, 1973, during a coup led by Gen. Augusto Pinochet against President Salvador Allende.Credit...Agence France-Presse — Getty Image

Ben: I don't want to hear your reading list. I want to hear your own thoughts. Your challenged for spamming the term "globalist" by 2 different people. Then you mentioned in your response "globalist" no less than 8 times! None of your stuff is ever actionable. Where do you stand on Project 2025? This is what I mean by grown up talk. Apparently Biden's trying to take action against this. Biden administration proposes new rule that would limit Trump purge Here's your strongest paragraph, but your use of terms is sloppy and inexact. Hey, I'm sloppy sometimes too. Ben: A globalist security state working on behalf of globalist commercial enterprise, coopting political parties and media. Globalists who want access to markets, resources and labor pools worldwide, and compliant governments, and globalists are not loyal to any particular region, nation, nationality, or government. Instead of "globalist", What aversion do you have to using the term "the corporate state", or corporatism or the multi national corporate state? Do you realize corporations also domestically coopt political parties? It's often about taxation. It's not just "globalists" over international policy! How about this? A corporate state working on behalf of commercial enterprise, coopting political parties and media. A corporate state that wants access to markets, resources and labor pools worldwide, and compliant governments, and the corporate state is not loyal to any particular region, nation, nationality, or government. It's much more precise, a bit redundant, but that's part of your writing style. Ben: How else did the US enter not one, not two, but three fantastically expensive yet counterproductive wars, notable for cruelty in results, since the JFKA? You're not making critical distinctions here. When you assert that GW's War in Iraq was a deep state or "globalist" war, you're really letting Bush off the hook for a very historically grave decision. This wasn't at all like the Vietnam War. There was no institutional pressure by the government to start that war, nor was there any political or popular pressure for Bush to invade Iraq, as there was in Afghanistan. This was a completely elective war by Bush and his PNAC bedfellows and the public got duped into it. . Ben: Which one of these wars, even if successful, would have benefited the US middle and employee classes? When you're seeking to assign blame. Your use of "globalist' in your writing is so corporate in that, the last term you'd ever use is "corporate". And you insisted many times in the past on using the term,"employee class". Why don't you ever use the term "working class"? Are these terms too direct for you? I hate to be so relevant but where do you stand in the UAW strike?

Exactly, W.! What a silly point to make. There's nothing uncivil with calling it "myopic", when he was so obviously overlooking the obvious. And Trump, brandishing a sword and dancing with the Saudis and holding the "sacred sphere" didn't register with Ben? Because in Ben's mind, Trump is not a "globalist?' But then this one. Ben:When did the expression "national security" morph into "global security" without even a blush? Sez who? Who are you quoting ? Ben in his tortured mind? As so often Ben, You're just spamming throwaway questions and not answering any. You're missing the very point. You're not talking to Thai kids trying to learn English. Raise you bar and stop trying to BS us! Blush that!

My condolences, I like Texas, and I like Texans, but unfortunately Texas is a slave state. Texas doesn't have as huge a history of slavery as some of the deep southern states. But in Texas the powerful just unmercifully pummel the powerless, and don't care if they're seen doing it, and there's not much of an attempt to hide it. If I could say something positive, it's that it's so bad. It has the most promise of turning to it's opposite. But for right now, we have to deal with Fascists.

Thank you Sandy, that was my point. But also, in the case of Project 2025, beware of the "false flag deep state". That is that people who say they are going after the deep state who are actually the deep state. They are the ones trying to economically marginalize us. With the second post, I sort of propose another deep state is the uninformed populace, not voting in their interests. On one level, WTF do I know? People can disagree about some actions. In this case, for example it could be about some departments of government being more useful than others. I like naming names and groups about specific actions they are taking or planning to take. I personally think a thread like this is much more invigorating when linking specific people and groups to actions, than coming to no more specific conclusion than both the "donks and the phants" are "deep state", or there all "globalists", and all "globalists" are the "deep state", which Greg D. pointed out to Ben that if you don't define your terms, is really meaningless. This sort of hazy innuendo and diversion to nowhere will never appeal say, to young people looking to the future, who want action. Strangely. I agree with Mitt Romney on this one. We can't just be old boomers barking at the deep state moon. If we can't be more specific about the problems, we should move on.

The next step is to work on the Deep State citizenry. You've now seen the Deep State's plan to economically marginalize you. You have to stop feeding them. You don't have to like the Democrats. But you have to vote in your interests. Stop voting for people who don't care about your lives.

Since we're talking about a deep state. How about something more tangible, and a little less abstract than the "deep state" being everyone who believes in foreign trade, and circumstances a bit more current and urgent than Ben's conspiracy "pie in the sky", where you'll be waiting forever to take any concrete action and "doing enough" is just an endless diatribe , saying the same things over and over again, which is an end in itself and probably is enough for Ben in Thailand. Let's talk about something in front of us. Ben has mentioned the "Deep state" more than any single poster here, and created this thread, so I'm sure he'd be the last to suspect this happening because the proponents expressed aim here is to do battle against the "deep state." Project 2025 is a plan from conservative think tanks to hit the ground running and not make the same mistakes when Trump gets elected in 2025. From previous experience, They are confident Trump will provide not one wit of resistance because as President before he was a wax plate they could impress upon, as he has no policy knowledge and legislatively they had their way. The plan is to reschedule and fire over 50,000 workers just to start, and eliminate the Departments of Education, no more Consumer Protection agencies, eliminate the Secretary of Health and Human Services and Department of Labor. To do this they would reschedule the employment status of probably 100's of thousands of federal employees in order to be able to take whatever tenure they have and fire them. Trump approved this before and when Biden entered offices he reinstated it . They will also gut the EPA and environmental regulation, gut the SEC, and in their culture wars, they've expressed they want to interfere with blue states rights to criminalize abortion, outlaw mail order abortion pills and outlaw pornography. It's an attack on civil servants, but more importantly an attempt to force a "unitary" view of government taking away checks and balances and concentrating the power of office on the executive branch. There are autocratic movements such as these going on throughout the world. And as a recent example of the danger in this, We're seeing the fallout in China with President Xi consolidating power to an extent that they've become so inflexible, they can't respond to the resultant economic emergencies they're experiencing. https://www.salon.com/2023/09/05/dark-right-wing-network-recruits-maga-army-to-replace-50k-workers-plans-to-purge/

That's true Matt. Now that people are starting to get hip that the Republicans are going to do nothing for them but only for work for the rich. They realize their only hope in winning is to steal elections. This quote is fro David Frum. A Canadian born conservative who I believe is now a naturalized U.S. citizen.

I tend to be skeptical. I'd like to be present at a good cross examining. heh heh But it's true, the real story might be Peter Baker and the NYT and Vanity Fair. So now instead of ignoring, they are going to more critically examine the WC findings? Is this a sea change? Time will tell It's actually a pretty hot story, though 60 years old, Tried and true to a lot of people. There was a post Watergate period where political expose on early evening Entertainment/Tabloid shows were very popular. I hope he and his story don't blow it!

That's great news Steve! She doesn't even wanna talk to him🤣🤣Hello Donald Melania,- yeah, "Say Hi to the Orange Tub for me." Hey who is Mitch talking to in the stall next door? It looks like we're not going to get Lindsey Graham, but wouldn't that be great if it was Clarence Thomas? That would mean we've come really far!

Imperialism has been going on for millennia. Colonialism has been going on for 500 years. And nationalism in Europe started in the 19 the Century. That would be your beginning. Again, What in hell,are you talking about? Globalism to Jack Ruby? Talk about straining to make some connection! Ben: Domestic politics is raw, ugly and depressing. Culture wars and ID-politics fetishes. That is what the media promotes and allows. I avoid all the red-blue kool-aid pissing wars, ID politics and culture clashes. This is not politics, this is government since the JFKA. The media never tells you this tax story that I have related, and which is irrefutable. Instead the media trains you to get into useless catfights over ID politics and culture wars, and blue or red kool-aid pissing wars. Ben:I avoid all the red-blue kool-aid pissing wars, ID politics and culture clashes. That's not true at all. This is coming from a guy who when he first came here, was continually railing against "identity politics" until i had to tell you it was getting boring. Ok, maybe you see it now, but talk about being a shill for the Fox disinformation echo chamber. You fell right into the tripe. Ben, I might might a book on this topic, perhaps not a good one, and who would labor through it? So, forgive me a universe of unstated nuances and caveats That's priceless self importance. It's also nonsense. No one will ever accuse you of a fly speck of nuance Ben. That's just sloppy thinking. You're conflating globalism with military interventionism, but there many people including Kennedy's own class of people who made their fortunes through globalism, and wanted to continue that. A globalist outlook toward trade which has actually been in force for millennia doesn't mean an aggressive nationalist foreign policy. Interventionists were globalists, but not all globalists are interventionist. Ben In about 5 days from now, you'll hear that Biden was in you area of the world. His message in Hanoi (who don't like the Chinese at all) is that he's not trying to contain China. Why is he saying this ? Because as I say China is freaking out at a decoupling that he's been initiating. Everybody know this, and most of China's enemies including the U.S. would prefer China's descent be gradual. For someone who was like me and concerned about China's unprecedented economic rise over the last 30 years. It appears you're now another fussy date that will never be pleased. .

Ben for years now has repetitively pushed that we can learn about the "deep state" by studying the JFKA , which is complete BS. The power players are 1000 more diverse now, than an alleged U.S. NSS coup 60 years ago. So his next convenient buzzword is "globalists" which he also runs into the ground. Yet he'd be the last to know that we are going through the first period of de globalization in our lifetime brought on largely by Biden's who was much more adept at using the government to accomplish such ends than a novice like Trump was. The Chinese are freaking out about the U.S, exploring new supply chains and trying to fire up their industrial base again because this is happening concurrently when their their economy is demographically collapsing. To do this will not be easy and will take several years. The world at large has grown a little concerned about the U.S. economically "going their own way." Of course it's always been Ben's stupid idea to think he could wipe out foreign trade. Tell that to his country of residence Thailand or Vietnam who are begging for foreign investment. Or any major world superpower or any country in the world, for that matter who are looking for raw materials to fuel their economies and technologies into the modern age.

Papa Huckabee's has also been stirring up some sh-t.

Now it's revealed In Isaacson's new book Elon Musk ordered his Starlink satellite communications network to be turned off near the Crimean coast last year to hobble a Ukrainian drone attack on Russian warships, according to a new biography

This all interesting speculation because it's all true. Who knows what Joe Biden knows about his health? I think he's running and is just playing his health by ear and is in the race until further notice. And, if everything goes in a linear fashion in the next 14 months, Biden will be re elected. I don't put much faith in recent polling because it's so far out and these polls also include people who aren't going to vote. Sandy is right. I've been for Biden stepping down ever since he became President. But he has surprised me to the upside. Biden has taken some advantage of the disarray of the Republican Party with Independents. Doug is right, he is the most successful Democratic President in 40 years. He's definitely the most anti corporate and is shaping policy for the future. The corporate sector has been buttoning their lip on it, because they realize Trump is so divisive and so ridiculous. If Biden was to pull out before the end of the year for health reasons, I wouldn't worry about Harris's awkwardness. It would immediately become an open race. It's the period in "24" from March to the Demo convention that would really be chaos and force the decision to the at one time "smoke filled rooms" at the convention. The problem I have with Kamala Harris is that if we're going to piss off a good chunk of our population, we may as well get some bang for the buck for it, like Joe Biden, rather than just getting a lot of the opposition hunkering down in their culture wars, which a Black Asian American from California will do. All of that is not her fault, but she hasn't done enough to fill the gap with her own identity to offset the same old culture wars resistance. We'd get a lot more cooperation and be much better off with Gavine Newsome if Biden were to be replaced. Watching the way Newsome handled Sean Hannity, he can easily go on Fox and cross over. But then the question is after that. If Biden dodges all the obstacles and becomes President again. Ultimately the chance that Biden could fill out his term as a functioning President at 86, seems pretty bleak.

Is there a "deep state"? The short answer is no. The state that is working against you that you should be most concerned about is the one that's attempting to economically marginalize your existence or foothold in the middle class. There is nothing "deep" or hidden about this. There are no conferences such as Davos where their sinister plans are carried out in secret. No it's business as usual. There are no conspiracies, they just all think alike. They have taken the levers of power from you without firing a shot, without people scarcely knowing how. So in essence calling this "deep" is not taking responsibility for all of us letting it happen over the last 40 years. The reason you should be trying to figure out who killed JFK is because you care and have a desire to get down to the truth. Or maybe there's a sleuthing aptitude you bring to it, which is fine too. Get over this idea that exposing JFK killers as coming from the NSS will change the course of history and make the U.S. dismantle the War machine. It's just childish dreaming. You're not on a mission from God. The idea that the U.S. is run by MIC, takes no account of the changes of the last 60 years. It's much bigger than the MIC. The MIC and military spending only account for 3% of the total economy. Nobody plays favorites of one industry against the other. They are all invested in different degrees as the times dictate. This idea that the MIC deep state is thwarting all efforts of peace is wrong. There just isn't sufficient, actionable political will toward world peace that would put anybody's feet to the fire. To end on the most positive, possible note, If there was a world peace movement that truly caught on throughout the planet*, to wind down government expenditures on Defense, (maybe brought on by external events, such as a nuclear escalation in the Ukraine war). it would definitely be opposed by the industry. But ultimately if it was out in the open and had the popular will of the peoples of the world, what could anyone really do? In the final analysis it's just one industry, and it's not going to go out of business entirely. Both government and private allocations fluctuate over the course of time, and whole companies and national industries do, and have died. Though it sounds like a pipe dream. The average age of an America is 38. And they are much more likely to feel affected about this than the truth about an assassination 60 years ago.

Yeah, This is what being President means, dummy!

Uh huh, why mention "Jewish" at all? Exactly, implying that as a Jew, he's a high risk of being a traitor, but certainly throughout our lives and the entire 20th century there were Jews in the highest levels of government. A few have run for President. Sandy I remember in the previous incarnation of this thread, you thought anti semitism was some prejudice of Jewish "incompetence." It's the complete opposite. It's Prouty's expressed fear that a very competent foe is in a very sensitive National Security position. Believe me anyone in such a position would have been checked out 6 ways to Sunday! I still am not. Jeff , as I say I applaud your effort, and on the whole I enjoyed reading it. I went to your footnote when I first read it. And it opened to a 35 page document I don't have time to read. It's very unclear. Certainly there was no specific dialog there attributed to Prouty. What point are you making? Can you give me a specific page you want to direct me to? Are you making Sandy's point? As I've already said, you can just say. "Ok he's not perfect, but his politics and apparent prejudices are another matter entirely. We believe him as a very credible witness."

Well, we've been through this a few months back where Michael relentlessly made a solid case that Prouty is anti semitc. His points were completely unopposed leaving the pro Prouty faction paralyzed, and unable to dispute any of Michael's facts, and left to just hurl insults at Michael, impugning his character with shrieks of MCADAMS! which was very childish as it's obvious Michael isn't an LNer. And it's happening again. This isn't the way you win arguments. At one point, I suggested that pro Prouty group should stop their hemorrhaging and just concede, and say, "Ok he's not perfect, but his politics and apparent prejudices are another matter entirely. We believe him as a very credible witness." In my mind that would have been the end of the bulk of it. But the inability to counter any of Michael's charges and yet the denial was almost MAGA like. The only substantive response to Michael was Jeff Carter, so it comes as no surprise Jeff would sink considerable time in defending Prouty and Jim would out his work here and start this thread. Jeff, I applaud that you've done considerable time on this. And you've covered of few of the oppositions points, but you have in now way refuted Prouty's right wing ties. I bet none of you guys will read Michael's links, which are really more specific and substantial. Jeff was thorough in bringing up the oppositions points, but mostly, didn't really effectively counter them. Yes the fact that Prouty would criticize his government for having a "jew" in a very prominent position in the defense department obviously indicates a distrust to having Jews in in high sensitive National Security positions. It is very disparaging when someone has probably worked all of his life to have risen to such a high position is then summarily judged for his ethnicity and questioned for his patriotism. If you choose the complete denial route. I think the next most defensible position is that , despite all of his associations and his denial about knowing the first thing about his right wing associations, (which he's really good at, because you can witness how much he folded like an armchair and in essence betrayed us before Wray and company's questioning !)we can't know for sure what's going on in Prouty's mind. But I'd say, just look for such patterns in behavior. By looking for such patterns, some of us were magically able to get it right and were able to connect the dots on recent figures that have come to prominence in Politics and Broadcast Journalism. heh heh