W. Niederhut

C'mon, Gil. I appreciate your informative posts and inquiries about the JFK assassination here on the forum, but, surely, you don't believe the false Trump/Fox narratives claiming that the prosecution of Trump's serious felonies is a result of persecution by the Deep State, do you? Trump (and Fox) started promoting these false "Deep State" persecution-of-Trump tropes in 2017, after evidence emerged of Russian interference in our 2016 election, (on Trump's behalf) and after the FBI began to investigate Michael Flynn's illegal December 2016 phone calls to Sergei Kisylak (about the Obama era sanctions against the Kremlin for interference in our 2016 U.S. election.) In essence, Trump and his Fox Ministry of Propaganda began, in 2017, to blame the "Deep State" for Trump's crimes-- despite the fact that James Comey and the FBI had played a major role in getting Trump elected in 2016! The same thing happened after Trump's J6 mob attack on the U.S. Congress. Tucker Carlson repeatedly promoted the false "Patriot Purge" narrative about Trump's coup attempt-- essentially blaming Trump's multi-faceted efforts to overturn the 2020 election on the Deep State. But, let's be clear. Trump wasn't indicted by the "Deep State" for 91 felonies this year. He was indicted by grand juries-- based on evidence of his serious criminal conduct.

I had never heard of Patrick McHenry until yesterday. According to Wikipedia, he launched his political career with the College Republicans, then worked for Karl Rove. I don't fault him for being vertically challenged, but he has a history of inappropriately insulting Senator Elizabeth Warren in the House and, now, Nancy Pelosi. Sounds like a smaller, thinner version of incel Rush Limbaugh with a bow tie.

Hear, hear! I was very impressed by Adam Schiff's commentaries during the Nunes Memo scam and the Congressional J6 hearings. Schiff would be a great U.S. Senator, and, perhaps, more. That said, I don't know much about the other Senate candidates, nor do I live in California.

The thing about this repetitive John McAdams/Michael Griffith "Swift Boat Vetting" defamation of Col. L. Fletcher Prouty is that the same old defamatory tropes can be repeated indefinitely on social media. Rinse and repeat the bunk until people believe it's true. The CIA propaganda people have been aggressively trying to discredit Prouty for more than 30 years for his insights about NSAM 263 and his identification of Allen Dulles's favorite black ops man, Ed Lansdale, in Dealey Plaza (which was corroborated by General Victor Krulak.) And, despite posting book-length, repetitive smears here about Prouty, Michael Griffith has never even read Prouty's own book, describing the details of his work on the McNamara/Taylor Report, NSAM 263, and his trip to Antarctica in November of 1963. Nor has Griffith posted his sources for insisting that Chiang Kai-shek's delegation never met secretly with Stalin in Tehran-- despite the fact that Chiang was, in fact, invited to Tehran. How are people supposed to respond to this kind of redundant Swift Boat Vetting propaganda? The consensus after 2004 was that John Kerry needed to respond more aggressively and repetitively to the repeated Swift Boat Vet ads on television. The smear job worked. But, honestly, it becomes tiresome and boring to respond to Griffith's repetitive defamation of Prouty on the forum. I'm taking a break from the task.

Thanks for posting this, Ben. Here's a tribute to my alma mater-- but these are not the same polite lyrics we used to sing at football games back in the day... 🤥

Ron Bulman just posted a White House press release from October 2, 1963 about JFK's intention to get out of Vietnam by December 31, 1965. (It's on Ron's "SIXTY" thread.) I wonder how Michael Griffith will Liberty Lobby this one... 🤥

Interesting, Ron. For some reason, (plain old ignorance?) I thought that JFK was keeping his NSAM 263 Vietnam withdrawal plan under wraps until after the 1964 election-- to avoid being accused of going soft on communism. But, on the contrary, it looks like the White House went public with JFK's plan to get out of Vietnam.

15% Say They Would Back Third Party Candidate October 2, 2023 at 12:25 pm EDT By Taegan Goddard A new NBC News poll finds that almost 15% of registered voters said that they will vote for a third party or independent candidate if given the option in 2024. However, the test did not include candidate names or information about them.

But, Matt, with their Big Oil bankrollers, the "No Labels" people will most likely be able to buy enough television ads to siphon significant votes away from the Democrats. It's the Age of Citizens United Dark Money Plutocracy. Obviously, their goal is to regain plutocratic GOP control of the White House and Senate (and to maintain control of the House and SCOTUS.)

The Tehran Conference was scheduled to begin on November 28, 1943. FWIW, here's a New York Times article dated November 26, 1943. Chiang Kai-shek Is Invited to Join Roosevelt-Churchill-Stalin Talk; CHIANG IS INVITED TO STALIN PARLEY By James B. Reston Nov. 26, 1943 LONDON, Nov. 25 -- Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek has been invited to any meeting that President Roosevelt, Prime Minister Churchill and Premier Stalin may hold in the near future, it was learned today.

And they will still have Joe Manchin and their third party "No Labels" fraudsters to undermine the Democrats.

And to theft of classified government documents? 🤥

Agreed. And one of the most disturbing things RFK, Jr. said in his recent Vanity Fair interview was that he views attempts to censor disinformation in the U.S. (e.g., re COVID vaccines) as a greater threat to our democracy than Trump's J6 attack on Congress! That is simply ludicrous. The Trump cult poses the greatest threat to American democracy and the rule of law in our nation's history-- with the exception of the Civil War. This ludicrous claim is also consistent with RFK, Jr.'s persistent refusal to criticize Trump and his proto-fascist cult.

This abundant "California water" promise reminds me of Trump's 2016 blather about having a "terrific healthcare plan that will cover everyone and cost less." He never had a healthcare plan! He reflexively caters to people's wish fulfillment fantasies without intending to fulfill his unrealistic promises.

So, Griffith, enough of your defamatory blather. Post the source for your claims about Chiang's travel itinerary, as I requested (above.) We all know that there has been a lot of McAdams-type disinformation published about Prouty since 1992. Show us the source of your "information" smearing Prouty's account of the Tehran Conference. Then tell us why Prouty flew the Chinese delegation from Cairo to Tehran in a VIP Lockheed Lodestar. Your explanation goes here:

RFK, Jr. is, obviously right about the longstanding influence of the CIA (Mockingbird) in the U.S. mainstream media, and the author of this Vanity Fair piece isn't about to address that issue honestly. Score one for RFK, Jr. But what troubles me the most about this article is the author's description of RFK, Jr.'s affect and cognitive style-- his irritability, paranoia, and cognitive rigidity. As a psychiatrist, I'm wondering, among other things, about 'roid rage-- the tendency of anabolic steroids to induce irritability and paranoia. Is RFK, Jr. suffering from 'roid rage? As the author points out, RFK, Jr. presents as angry and stubborn, lacking in humor and apparent humility. He, certainly, exhibits no genuine courtesy or affability-- even in an interview with a nationally published journalist! (Not very judicious, to say the least.) The author's observations about the COVID death statistics in relation to the introduction of vaccines in various countries happens to be correct, and RFK, Jr.'s published claims about vaccine-induced morbidity and mortality are scientifically false. But RFK, Jr. seems to be unable to reason in a calm, intellectually honest way about his mistake. Instead, he angrily accuses the journalist of lying! Oddly, he also denies being an "anti-vaxxer." (Mark Knight started a thread on this subject recently.) This seems to be part of a more generalized tendency in RFK, Jr. to interpret any disagreement with his opinions as a nefarious attack by people aligned with Big Pharma, the Democratic Party, and/or (?) Mockingbird. Is he intellectually grandiose? Finally, I'm also, again, perplexed by RFK, Jr.'s tendency to downplay the serious threat of Donald Trump's proto-fascist MAGA cult-- and J6 mob-- to American democracy. In a nutshell, this article confirms a lot of concerns that many of us have expressed about RFK, Jr.'s candidacy this year. And there are reports today that RFK, Jr. may opt to run as a third party candidate-- contrary to his previous claims on that subject.

I wonder, Leslie. The danger of RFK, Jr.'s third party candidacy is that he could tip the Electoral balance to Trump's fascist cult in 2024-- in the same way that George W. Bush was tragically "elected" in 2000 by Ralph Nader's third party candidacy. (Incidentally, Ralph Nader just endorsed Biden this week, acknowledging that we need to keep Trump out of office in our American "duopoly.")

I'm responding to Michael Griffith's latest Prouty defamation post in red (below.) Michael Griffith wrote: You need to learn to read a bit more carefully, and you need to watch Prouty's 1994 interview. I did not say that the FDR-was-poisoned theory was Prouty's theory. I said that in the 1994 interview, Prouty took the nutty theory seriously, which he plainly did. Go watch the video. The theory originated with the paranoid madman Joseph Stalin. Prouty also took this craziness seriously in his writings. Huh, Michael? I need to "read" a video "more carefully, eh?" Makes a lot of sense. The truth is that you need to read Prouty's book, at long last. He never wrote that he believed Stalin's theory about Churchill poisoning FDR. His reference to Elliott Roosevelt's own writings about the 1946 meeting with Stalin appears on page 17-- in the context of discussing Churchill and FDR's well known disagreements about the post-WWII destinies of European colonies in Asia. I have no explanation for Elliott Roosevelt not mentioning the Nationalist Chinese delegation's visit to Tehran-- unless Roosevelt understood that the delegation's meeting with Stalin was supposed to be off the record. Oh, please. So Elliott didn't mention this historic secret meeting because, gee, it was supposed to be off the record, as if he would have seen that as a reason not to talk about the meeting! I mean, you can't really believe that. Oh, please. Are you claiming that FDR and Stalin couldn't possibly have had an agreement that any secret Nationalist Chinese meeting with Stalin (in Tehran) needed to be off-the-record? And, if so, that Elliott Roosevelt opted to respect the terms of that agreement? The obvious explanation is that he didn't mention seeing the Chinese delegation because he never saw them--not at Habanayah Airport in Iraq and not in Tehran. Again, we know that Chiang and his delegation flew back to China right after the Cairo Conference, and that they stopped in Ramgarh, India, on 11/28/43, two days after leaving Cairo, to visit Chinese troops who were being trained there. Post your source and reference link about the specific timing of Chiang's flights from Cairo to India -- proving that Chiang and/or his delegates couldn't have flown to Tehran en route to India. And, when, pray tell, could this alleged meeting have even occurred? Not surprisingly, we have a virtually hour-by-hour accounting of Stalin's whereabouts during the conference. This is on top of the fact that not a single Soviet, Chinese, American, or British source, official or unofficial, says one word about a Chinese delegation being in Tehran. Prouty specifically wrote that historians were not aware of the Nationalist Chinese delegation's meeting with Stalin in Tehran, and that it was "one of the best kept secrets of WWII." Conversely, to believe your hypothesis, we would have to posit that Prouty was not telling the truth about flying Chiang's delegates from Cairo to Tehran on a VIP Lockheed Lodestar. Under the circumstances, I believe Prouty, not your hypothesis.

RFK Jr. to Launch Independent Bid September 29, 2023 at 3:10 pm EDT By Taegan Goddard 142 Comments Robert F. Kennedy Jr. plans to announce he will run for president as an independent on October 9 in Pennsylvania, Mediaite reports.

As usual, Michael Griffith has posted another series of false claims about Col. L. Fletcher Prouty. Griffith refers to Prouty's "nutty theory" that Churchill had poisoned FDR. This is inaccurate, like so many of Griffith's defamatory Education Forum posts about Prouty. On page 17 of the paperback edition of Prouty's book, JFK-- The CIA, Vietnam, and the Plot to Assassinate John F. Kennedy, (Sky Horse/2011) Prouty referenced Elliott Roosevelt's own account of his 1946 meeting with Stalin in which Stalin theorized that Churchill had poisoned FDR. It wasn't Prouty's "nutty theory." On page 16 of the same book, (op.cit.) Prouty published a detailed account of his role in flying Chiang Kai-shek's Chinese delegation from Cairo to Tehran in a VIP Lockheed Lodestar. While Prouty stopped to re-fuel the Lodestar in Habbaniya, Iraq, Elliott Roosevelt landed at Habbaniya in a U.S. B-25. Prouty spoke to Elliott Roosevelt and his pilot. There is no reference in Prouty's book to T.V. Soong "controlling Chiang Kai-shek." He merely wrote, in passing, that Madame Chiang was Soong's sister, and mentioned her celebrated appearance with Churchill, Chiang, and FDR in Cairo. I have no explanation for Elliott Roosevelt not mentioning the Nationalist Chinese delegation's visit to Tehran-- unless Roosevelt understood that the delegation's meeting with Stalin was supposed to be off the record.

Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) rips the House MAGA fraudsters a new one... You go, girl !! 🤥

Paul, Was CIA Operation Bloodstone based in the U.S., and New Haven-- or in Europe? I don't know much about it. But I do know that Prouty did not work for the CIA, except as a USAF liaison. As for the Tehran Conference issue raised by Griffith, I simply don't believe that Prouty was making up his highly detailed account of flying Chiang Kai-shek's delegation from Cairo to Tehran for a secret meeting with Stalin.

FYI, folks. Prouty wrote highly specific details about his flight from the Cairo Conference to Tehran with Chiang Kai-shek's Chinese delegation-- even specifying the plane that he flew and his encounter with Elliot Roosevelt at the airport in Iraq where the planes re-fueled en route to Tehran. Also, Prouty mentioned a detail that our U.S. government-employed Prouty-defamer, Michael Griffith, neglected to mention. To wit, Madame Chiang Kai-shek was T.V. Soong's sister! Chiang Kai-shek's Chinese delegation's meeting with Stalin was, apparently, kept secret because Stalin was in the awkward position of being in an alliance with both Mao Tse-Tung's Chinese Communist Party, (at war with Chiang's Nationalist Army) and the U.S. and British allies fighting the Japanese, with Chiang Kai-shek. Obviously, an important part of FDR's agenda in Tehran was to elicit Soviet help in defeating Japan-- just as he had elicited Chiang Kai-shek's help in establishing B-29 bases in China, for the U.S. war against Japan. In the process, FDR must have also hoped that Stalin would ask Mao Tse-Tung to forestall attacking Chiang's Nationalist Army until the Japanese had been defeated. Prouty-defamer, Michael Griffith, apparently, didn't consider the logistical possibility that Chiang Kai-shek and his delegation could have met secretly with Stalin before the well-publicized Tehran meeting of FDR, Stalin, and Churchill at the Soviet embassy.

Jeff, I just looked this one up in my 2011 Sky Horse paperback edition of JFK-- the CIA, Vietnam, and the Plot to Assassinate John F. Kennedy. (The relevant discission about the secret Chinese delegation at the Tehran Conference is found on pages 13-16 and 173-74.) Prouty mentioned that the secret Chinese delegation meeting with Stalin in Tehran was one of the "best kept secrets" of WWII, and has not been mentioned by historians. He points out that he, personally, flew the Chinese delegation from Cairo to Tehran, and that Chiang Kai-shek and Madame Chiang were flown to Tehran (from Cairo) with the Roosevelt delegation or another military transport. Prouty claims that the purpose of the secret Chinese meeting with Stalin was to obtain Stalin's support in dissuading Mao Tse-Tung's Chinese Communist Army from attacking the Chinese Nationalists until the Japanese had been driven from the Chinese mainland.