If JFK had gone two terms...

[Sid Walker]

As I've made clear on other threads, I am one of those who believes that the JFK assassination has - in broad outline - already been solved.

Final Judgment, in my opinion, identified the conspiratorial network ultimately responsible for JFK's murder and the subsequent cover-up. While others were involved in the conspiracy (and author Mike Piper acknowledges this), the key decision-makers were Zionists.

According to this hypothesis, a crucial reason behind JFK's murder was his policies on Israel and the Middle East.

In that context, it is interesting to speculate on how events might have evolved in Israel/Palestine had JFK remained in power for two terms.

Would the 1967 war - and it's outcome - have been at all conceivable with Kennedy in the White House?

Would the Israelis have been able to complete their production of nuclear weapons? (Johnson allowed Israel to do this)

Would the USS Liberty have been sunk in an 'accident' on Kennedy's watch? Would Kennedy have permitted a cover-up of such an incident?

Without Israel's 1967 land grab - which exceeded in scope Israel's failed expansionist push in 1956 - the current shape of the Hold Land and surrounding area would be very different. World attention would have remained focussed - after 1967 as before - on the original sources of Palestinian grievance, not the additional injustices of 1967 whose reversal has now become the center-piece of 'respectable' peace proposals.

I submit that, from what we know of Kennedy and his trusted advisers - and from what we have learnt since his death of his independent and fair-minded approach to Israel, Arab nations and the US Zionist lobby - it is inconceivable that events would have swung so far towards Israel's advantage during the 1960s had he survived.

If JFK had lived, the following outcomes were likely:

- no Israeli nuclear weapons

- no 'successful' expansionist Israeli war, such as the 1967 6-day war

- no US toleration of Israel's persistent refusal to honour the right of return for 1948+ Palestinian refugees.

- no willingness to let Zionist networks progressively dominate the American polity.

In other words, no militarily ascendant Israel, automatically supported by an infiltrated and essentially brainless US Government, such as we experience today.

It is true that other parts of the world might also have fared very differently had Kennedy and his Administration survived. Vietnam and Cuba spring to mind. Yet in neither case did the frosty and aggressive policies of Kennedy's replacements succeed in the long term. In 2007, Vietnam is united under Communist rule - and so is Cuba. If control of these countries was a key goal for the conspirators who killed JFK, they failed miserably.

In the case of Israel, by contrast, 'success' in perpetuating long-term injustice is rather blatant.

Edited May 30, 2007 by Sid Walker

[Mark Stapleton]

As I've made clear on other threads, I am one of those who believes that the JFK assassination has - in broad outline - already been solved.

Final Judgment, in my opinion, identified the conspiratorial network ultimately responsible for JFK's murder and the subsequent cover-up. While others were involved in the conspiracy (and author Mike Piper acknowledges this), the key decision-makers were Zionists.

According to this hypothesis, a crucial reason behind JFK's murder was his policies on Israel and the Middle East.

In that context, it is interesting to speculate on how events might have evolved in Israel/Palestine had JFK remained in power for two terms.

Would the 1967 war - and it's outcome - have been at all conceivable with Kennedy in the White House?

Would the Israelis have been able to complete their production of nuclear weapons? (Johnson allowed Israel to do this)

Would the USS Liberty have been sunk in an 'accident' on Kennedy's watch? Would Kennedy have permitted a cover-up of such an incident?

Without Israel's 1967 land grab - which exceeded in scope Israel's failed expansionist push in 1956 - the current shape of the Hold Land and surrounding area would be very different. World attention would have remained focussed - after 1967 as before - on the original sources of Palestinian grievance, not the additional injustices of 1967 whose reversal has now become the center-piece of 'respectable' peace proposals.

I submit that, from what we know of Kennedy and his trusted advisers - and from what we have learnt since his death of his independent and fair-minded approach to Israel, Arab nations and the US Zionist lobby - it is inconceivable that events would have swung so far towards Israel's advantage during the 1960s had he survived.

If JFK had lived, the following outcomes were likely:

- no Israeli nuclear weapons

- no 'successful' expansionist Israeli war, such as the 1967 6-day war

- no US toleration of Israel's persistent refusal to honour the right of return for 1948+ Palestinian refugees.

- no willingness to let Zionist networks progressively dominate the American polity.

In other words, no militarily ascendant Israel, automatically supported by an infiltrated and essentially brainless US Government, such as we experience today.

It is true that other parts of the world might also have fared very differently had Kennedy and his Administration survived. Vietnam and Cuba spring to mind. Yet in neither case did the frosty and aggressive policies of Kennedy's replacements succeed in the long term. In 2007, Vietnam is united under Communist rule - and so is Cuba. If control of these countries was a key goal for the conspirators who killed JFK, they failed miserably.

In the case of Israel, by contrast, 'success' in perpetuating long-term injustice is rather blatant.

Good post Sid (I've been away from the forum for a while).

It's true that America's hard headed support for Israel and abandonment of any fair minded approach to the Middle East situation appears to be their only 'success' on the foreign policy scoreboard to date. If you can call the resultant toxic cesspool of hatred within the Middle East towards the US and Israel a success, that is. It's a shame that more Americans choose not to comment on the plight of the Palestinians after 40 years of cruel occupation. Perhaps Western sympathy towards oppressed people was exhausted by the global effort to rid the world of South Africa's apartheid regime. The apartheid regime was dismantled but South Africa is still here, proving that regimes can be pressured into changing for the better without the nation being 'annihilated'. The fact that the world's most powerful nation is totally incapable of influencing domestic Israeli policy towards the Palestinians strengthens my suspicion that Israel is indeed the missing piece in the JFK assassination puzzle, with the unconditional submission of the US to Israeli Middle East policy beginning almost immediately after JFK's demise.

Ahh, those dark secrets are surely the tie that binds.

[Myra Bronstein]

Sid, Mark,

If I were to know nothing about this angle but wanted to learn, would Final Judgment be the book to read?

Is there an alternative or is Piper the only author willing to take this on?

Also, does Piper discuss Joseph Milteer in his book?

I'm especially interested in him since it's obvious that he was plugged into the plan, and I think he was photographed in Dealey. Plaza.

So as I was snooping around for details on him I found this:

http://www.jfkmontreal.com/joseph_milteer.htm

"After the assassination, Milteer told the same informant, William Somersett, that it was a Jewish conspiracy that sponsored Kennedy’s murder. In fact, Milteer referred to the person in charge as "the big Jew." According to an FBI report, Milteer told Somersett that Martin Luther King and Attorney General Kennedy were now unimportant, but the next move would be against "the big Jew." Milteer described the assassination as "a Communist conspiracy by Jews to overthrow the United States government."(9)

This information is extremely important because Milteer was clearly a man with prior knowledge about the assassination. Despite his extremist politics, Milteer was a person to be taken seriously. His comment about Martin Luther King, Robert Kennedy, and "the big Jew" tells us three things. First, his reference to "the big Jew" corroborates my thesis that one Jewish individual—likely Louis Bloomfield—ran the coup against Kennedy. Second, it reveals that right-wing extremists broke ranks with the Jewish-led coup immediately after the assassination. Apparently, Milteer and his associates had made a pact with Bloomfield to support the coup but secretly plotted to kill him—Bloomfield—upon completion of the deed. Third, it suggests that contingency plans were in place in 1963—by the right-wing extremists—to kill Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy."

More questions:

Does this information jibe with what you know/believe?

Who is Louis Bloomfield?

Thanks.

[Kathleen Collins]

As I've made clear on other threads, I am one of those who believes that the JFK assassination has - in broad outline - already been solved.

Final Judgment, in my opinion, identified the conspiratorial network ultimately responsible for JFK's murder and the subsequent cover-up. While others were involved in the conspiracy (and author Mike Piper acknowledges this), the key decision-makers were Zionists.

According to this hypothesis, a crucial reason behind JFK's murder was his policies on Israel and the Middle East.

In that context, it is interesting to speculate on how events might have evolved in Israel/Palestine had JFK remained in power for two terms.

Would the 1967 war - and it's outcome - have been at all conceivable with Kennedy in the White House?

Would the Israelis have been able to complete their production of nuclear weapons? (Johnson allowed Israel to do this)

Would the USS Liberty have been sunk in an 'accident' on Kennedy's watch? Would Kennedy have permitted a cover-up of such an incident?

Without Israel's 1967 land grab - which exceeded in scope Israel's failed expansionist push in 1956 - the current shape of the Hold Land and surrounding area would be very different. World attention would have remained focussed - after 1967 as before - on the original sources of Palestinian grievance, not the additional injustices of 1967 whose reversal has now become the center-piece of 'respectable' peace proposals.

I submit that, from what we know of Kennedy and his trusted advisers - and from what we have learnt since his death of his independent and fair-minded approach to Israel, Arab nations and the US Zionist lobby - it is inconceivable that events would have swung so far towards Israel's advantage during the 1960s had he survived.

If JFK had lived, the following outcomes were likely:

- no Israeli nuclear weapons

- no 'successful' expansionist Israeli war, such as the 1967 6-day war

- no US toleration of Israel's persistent refusal to honour the right of return for 1948+ Palestinian refugees.

- no willingness to let Zionist networks progressively dominate the American polity.

In other words, no militarily ascendant Israel, automatically supported by an infiltrated and essentially brainless US Government, such as we experience today.

It is true that other parts of the world might also have fared very differently had Kennedy and his Administration survived. Vietnam and Cuba spring to mind. Yet in neither case did the frosty and aggressive policies of Kennedy's replacements succeed in the long term. In 2007, Vietnam is united under Communist rule - and so is Cuba. If control of these countries was a key goal for the conspirators who killed JFK, they failed miserably.

In the case of Israel, by contrast, 'success' in perpetuating long-term injustice is rather blatant.

Good post Sid (I've been away from the forum for a while).

It's true that America's hard headed support for Israel and abandonment of any fair minded approach to the Middle East situation appears to be their only 'success' on the foreign policy scoreboard to date. If you can call the resultant toxic cesspool of hatred within the Middle East towards the US and Israel a success, that is. It's a shame that more Americans choose not to comment on the plight of the Palestinians after 40 years of cruel occupation. Perhaps Western sympathy towards oppressed people was exhausted by the global effort to rid the world of South Africa's apartheid regime. The apartheid regime was dismantled but South Africa is still here, proving that regimes can be pressured into changing for the better without the nation being 'annihilated'. The fact that the world's most powerful nation is totally incapable of influencing domestic Israeli policy towards the Palestinians strengthens my suspicion that Israel is indeed the missing piece in the JFK assassination puzzle, with the unconditional submission of the US to Israeli Middle East policy beginning almost immediately after JFK's demise.

Ahh, those dark secrets are surely the tie that binds.

I find this theory very interesting. There was talk that the Mossad had brought down the World Trade Center and 3 Israelis jumping up and down in glee. This is something I read on the Internet shortly after 9-11. And I recall Arab names not being on the manifest of the flights. There is a lot of info about 9-11 on the Internet. And though I now find it difficult to read or hear about it anymore, I wonder what your opinions are about Israel and 9-11.

And also, was the Mossad behind the Palestinian convicted of killing Senator Robert F. Kennedy in 1968?

Kathy

[Sid Walker]

As I've made clear on other threads, I am one of those who believes that the JFK assassination has - in broad outline - already been solved.

Final Judgment, in my opinion, identified the conspiratorial network ultimately responsible for JFK's murder and the subsequent cover-up. While others were involved in the conspiracy (and author Mike Piper acknowledges this), the key decision-makers were Zionists.

According to this hypothesis, a crucial reason behind JFK's murder was his policies on Israel and the Middle East.

In that context, it is interesting to speculate on how events might have evolved in Israel/Palestine had JFK remained in power for two terms.

Would the 1967 war - and it's outcome - have been at all conceivable with Kennedy in the White House?

Would the Israelis have been able to complete their production of nuclear weapons? (Johnson allowed Israel to do this)

Would the USS Liberty have been sunk in an 'accident' on Kennedy's watch? Would Kennedy have permitted a cover-up of such an incident?

Without Israel's 1967 land grab - which exceeded in scope Israel's failed expansionist push in 1956 - the current shape of the Hold Land and surrounding area would be very different. World attention would have remained focussed - after 1967 as before - on the original sources of Palestinian grievance, not the additional injustices of 1967 whose reversal has now become the center-piece of 'respectable' peace proposals.

I submit that, from what we know of Kennedy and his trusted advisers - and from what we have learnt since his death of his independent and fair-minded approach to Israel, Arab nations and the US Zionist lobby - it is inconceivable that events would have swung so far towards Israel's advantage during the 1960s had he survived.

If JFK had lived, the following outcomes were likely:

- no Israeli nuclear weapons

- no 'successful' expansionist Israeli war, such as the 1967 6-day war

- no US toleration of Israel's persistent refusal to honour the right of return for 1948+ Palestinian refugees.

- no willingness to let Zionist networks progressively dominate the American polity.

In other words, no militarily ascendant Israel, automatically supported by an infiltrated and essentially brainless US Government, such as we experience today.

It is true that other parts of the world might also have fared very differently had Kennedy and his Administration survived. Vietnam and Cuba spring to mind. Yet in neither case did the frosty and aggressive policies of Kennedy's replacements succeed in the long term. In 2007, Vietnam is united under Communist rule - and so is Cuba. If control of these countries was a key goal for the conspirators who killed JFK, they failed miserably.

In the case of Israel, by contrast, 'success' in perpetuating long-term injustice is rather blatant.

Good post Sid (I've been away from the forum for a while).

It's true that America's hard headed support for Israel and abandonment of any fair minded approach to the Middle East situation appears to be their only 'success' on the foreign policy scoreboard to date. If you can call the resultant toxic cesspool of hatred within the Middle East towards the US and Israel a success, that is. It's a shame that more Americans choose not to comment on the plight of the Palestinians after 40 years of cruel occupation. Perhaps Western sympathy towards oppressed people was exhausted by the global effort to rid the world of South Africa's apartheid regime. The apartheid regime was dismantled but South Africa is still here, proving that regimes can be pressured into changing for the better without the nation being 'annihilated'. The fact that the world's most powerful nation is totally incapable of influencing domestic Israeli policy towards the Palestinians strengthens my suspicion that Israel is indeed the missing piece in the JFK assassination puzzle, with the unconditional submission of the US to Israeli Middle East policy beginning almost immediately after JFK's demise.

Ahh, those dark secrets are surely the tie that binds.

Thanks Mark

It may be overstating the case to say "the unconditional submission of the US to Israeli Middle East policy beginning almost immediately after JFK's demise".

I'd like to clarify my views on the shift towards Zionist policy domination, which I think has certainly happened since 1963, but which was by no means a simple one-step phase-shift.

The long-term change that has occured is a shift from rough even handedness in middle eastern policy to utterly egregious, one-sided bias. This has been a slow process - or perhaps more accurately, it happened in leaps and spurts, with occasional minor reversals.

In the 1960 US election, the Zionists faced two Presidential candidates who were (or at least wished to be) relatively even handed. Over the course of a few decades, the Zionist Lobby has consolidated its position to the point that in elections these days, there is typically a choice of two pro-Zionist teams.

Here's my one-sentence per President wrap on US Presidents since Kennedy, FWIW, viewed from the perspective of the co-ordinators of the Zionist Lobby at the time.

- Johnson. Strong ally (although at that time, much support had to be given away from the glare of publicity).

- Nixon. Willing to cut deals and lend support to Israel under pressure - but not trustworthy. In fact, this guy has a real grudge against us. Serious danger he'll go bad on us in his second term...

- Ford. Easily manipulable, but that can cut both ways. Not fully trustworthy.

- Carter. Danger! Keen to be 'even-handed'. Needs very careful management and destabilization. A sec0ond term might be disastrous.

- Reagan. We can do business during and with this Administration, and grow in influence, but it will not be a cakewalk. Needs careful management.

- Bush 1. Sly and willing to cut deals that recognize growing Zionist power, but not still not 'bought and sold' (by The Lobby, at any rate!) Careful management and destabilization needed.

- Clinton. Smart and aware of The Lobby's now decisive power. Both he and his pesky wife are rather too keen to be 'even-handed'. Needs destabilization from early in his term onwards, and very careful 'management'.

- Bush !!. Putty in our hands

All in all, it's been a long haul to go from out of power in the leadership of both major parties in 1960 (although influential behind the scenes) to firmly ensconced in power in both major parties.

Damned hard work, actually!

Spare a thought for these poor guys. They must get tired from time to time - although of course more young zealots and/or opportunists are recruited every year. It's amazing who money can buy.

These days, thanks to progressive dominance within Congress (that took a few decades to achieve), the US taxpayer largely foots the bill for The Lobby and its activities. It's called 'recycling'. The amount of subsidy the USA gives to Israel is comparable to the funds Zionists spend to subvert the US political process, give or take a few billion.

A nice touch... by no means essential, but every $ billion helps!

Look after the billions and the trillions take care of themselves!

Edited June 5, 2007 by Sid Walker

[Myra Bronstein]

I don't know for sure if this is legit, but if it is then Milteer was just scapegoating jews 'cause he hated them along with blacks:

"Q: Even though Oswald spent 3 years supposedly or allegedly in Russia, he still believes that this is not a plot...

(BREAKS IN) - from Russia, no. He said that it was not, but that we had to now impress on the people of the United States that this was a Communist Zionist Jew Conspiracy to kill the President, but he said we know it isn't, but that is what we have got to get into the hands of the people now, that this man was murdered by the Jewish Zionist Communist, of course the pamphlet is coming to be scattered all over the United States."

http://cuban-exile.com/doc_051-075/doc0062e.html

It's a long interview, and it's repeatedly made clear that Milteer and the KKK et al wanted to set up jews as patsies.

Don't know if Piper's book overlaps with this or not since I haven't read it.

[John Geraghty]

Myra,

jfkmontreal.com is an absolutely disgraveful website. It is run by someone called Salvador Astucia. He used to post on this forum until he was banned. He labelled John Simkin and Andy Walker as Zionist propagandists on the site, see here, http://www.jfkmontreal.com/ngfl/edforum.htm

The site is thoroughly unreliable. Another page on the site claims that Israel triggered the Tsunami in Asia.

John

[Kathleen Collins]

Myra,

jfkmontreal.com is an absolutely disgraveful website. It is run by someone called Salvador Astucia. He used to post on this forum until he was banned. He labelled John Simkin and Andy Walker as Zionist propagandists on the site, see here, http://www.jfkmontreal.com/ngfl/edforum.htm

The site is thoroughly unreliable. Another page on the site claims that Israel triggered the Tsunami in Asia.

John

About that jfkmontreal.com site. You can tell he's anti-semitic. He also has material on the death of John Lennon. How reliable is that? I've heard from another person to not believe a word he says. Did Jose Perdomo, aka San Genis, a survivor of the Bay of Pigs incident, have something to do with Lennon's killing, as he was the guard that night? Also his description of the Dakota -- is it laid out the way he said it was?

Kathy

[Myra Bronstein]

Myra,

jfkmontreal.com is an absolutely disgraveful website. It is run by someone called Salvador Astucia. He used to post on this forum until he was banned. He labelled John Simkin and Andy Walker as Zionist propagandists on the site, see here, http://www.jfkmontreal.com/ngfl/edforum.htm

The site is thoroughly unreliable. Another page on the site claims that Israel triggered the Tsunami in Asia.

John

Ok, good to know.

Won't waste my time there.

Thanks John.

[Myra Bronstein]

Myra,

jfkmontreal.com is an absolutely disgraveful website. It is run by someone called Salvador Astucia. He used to post on this forum until he was banned. He labelled John Simkin and Andy Walker as Zionist propagandists on the site, see here, http://www.jfkmontreal.com/ngfl/edforum.htm

The site is thoroughly unreliable. Another page on the site claims that Israel triggered the Tsunami in Asia.

John

About that jfkmontreal.com site. You can tell he's anti-semitic. He also has material on the death of John Lennon. How reliable is that? I've heard from another person to not believe a word he says. Did Jose Perdomo, aka San Genis, a survivor of the Bay of Pigs incident, have something to do with Lennon's killing, as he was the guard that night? Also his description of the Dakota -- is it laid out the way he said it was?

Kathy

Well I won't rule out gov't complicity in the Lennon murder, but I will rule out the jfkmontreal website.

Thanks Kathy. I appreciate the input.

[Sid Walker]

Sid, Mark,

If I were to know nothing about this angle but wanted to learn, would Final Judgment be the book to read?

Is there an alternative or is Piper the only author willing to take this on?

Also, does Piper discuss Joseph Milteer in his book?

I'm especially interested in him since it's obvious that he was plugged into the plan, and I think he was photographed in Dealey. Plaza.

So as I was snooping around for details on him I found this:

http://www.jfkmontreal.com/joseph_milteer.htm

"After the assassination, Milteer told the same informant, William Somersett, that it was a Jewish conspiracy that sponsored Kennedy’s murder. In fact, Milteer referred to the person in charge as "the big Jew." According to an FBI report, Milteer told Somersett that Martin Luther King and Attorney General Kennedy were now unimportant, but the next move would be against "the big Jew." Milteer described the assassination as "a Communist conspiracy by Jews to overthrow the United States government."(9)

This information is extremely important because Milteer was clearly a man with prior knowledge about the assassination. Despite his extremist politics, Milteer was a person to be taken seriously. His comment about Martin Luther King, Robert Kennedy, and "the big Jew" tells us three things. First, his reference to "the big Jew" corroborates my thesis that one Jewish individual—likely Louis Bloomfield—ran the coup against Kennedy. Second, it reveals that right-wing extre

There are two references to mists broke ranks with the Jewish-led coup immediately after the assassination. Apparently, Milteer and his associates had made a pact with Bloomfield to support the coup but secretly plotted to kill him—Bloomfield—upon completion of the deed. Third, it suggests that contingency plans were in place in 1963—by the right-wing extremists—to kill Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy."

More questions:

Does this information jibe with what you know/believe?

Who is Louis Bloomfield?

Thanks.

Myra,

IMO (Mark can speak very capably for himself) it is worth reading Final Judgment. Very much so.

If you want to get it, you have a number of options including an ebook version that has the advantage of being a searchable PDF file. However, you can't take it to bed, unless you sleep with your computer.

Piper's radio show also deals, from time to time, with the JFK assassination. His show is archived at the RBN website. Free downloads. In the USA, you could listen live on shortwave, I guess, as well as via the web. It's a call in show. Ring him up!

Piper is not an academic or mainstream journalist. He describes himself is a "hack writer with opinions". I think that is excessivly modest, and doesn't do him justice, but readers, especially on the left, need to bear in mind cultural adjustments needed to bridge the gap between populist and liberal discourse (using liberal in the American sense).

From the first publication of Final Judgment in the mid 90s, he was either ignored or savaged by 'mainstream' JFK assassination investigators, both pro- and anti-conspiracy. Deborah Conway, I understand, offered to join a JDL picket to keep him out of a particular event.

In response to attacks, of which he has experienced many, Piper can get rather cross. There is, of course, a quintessential example of this process at work on this forum - see the threads about (mainly attacking) Piper during his brief sojourn on the forum.

Having said that - and I am not his apologist - I think the following is true of Piper's views.

He is not 'anti-Jewish' in the sense that he has a 'racist' laothing for Jews. He is, IMO. actually fair-minded and acknowledges many Jewish sources in his own writings.

He is very knowledgeable in his main areas of specialization: Zionist power in America in general, the JFK assassination in particular.

He is anti-Jewish in the sense that he has a deep dislike for - and distrust of - the Jewish religion in most of its manifestations.

He is strongly anti-Zionist.

If you don't feel you can handle that mix of views and values, proceed no further...

You cited the website of Salvador Astucia

He's a different kettle of fish.

Piper's Final Judgment (6th edition) has two main references to Milteer. This is one of them in the Q & A section:

What about the role of the Minute Men and other "right wing

extremists" in the conspiracy? Guy Banister was tied to the Minute

Men. And isn't it true that a right-winger named Joseph Milteer knew

in advance that JFK was going to be shot from a high building and that

Milteer was in Dallas for the assassination?

This is another popular distraction that has kept JFK assassination researchers busy.

Milteer was not one of the masterminds of the JFK

assassination conspiracy nor was he a player in the actual plot to kill JFK

that ultimately succeeded. It is conceivable Milteer did have some

knowledge about an alleged plot to kill JFK in Miami. Information may

have been leaked to Milteer by one of the low-level conspirators about some

plot and he may have wanted to think, being a Kennedy hater, that he was

"on the inside" of some conspiracy, but you can be certain that he was not.

Milteer bragged of his "knowledge" to a police informant and that

"knowledge," actually, may have been disinformation leaked to Milteer in

order to distract attention from the real conspiracy. Milteer may have been

brought to Dallas at the time of the JFK assassination for some other reason

under some other pretense, for example, thinking that he was part of some

"dummy" assassination attempt to provoke a backlash against Fidel Castro.

Again, we'll never know. One could spin any number of scenarios.

Personally, I'm not convinced that photographs which purport to show

Milteer in Dallas on November 22 actually are photographs of Milteer.

Former CIA contract operative Gerry Patrick Hemming has said that he

himself had almost been in attendance at the meeting where Milteer made

the remarks about the impending attack on JFK and that he (Hemming)

avoided the meeting because he sensed that a set-up was in the works;

Hemming has speculated that he believes that he (Hemming) was also being

set up as a possible "patsy." So this is real food for thought.

Would Gerry care to comment?

Edited June 6, 2007 by Sid Walker

[Myra Bronstein]

Sid, Mark,

If I were to know nothing about this angle but wanted to learn, would Final Judgment be the book to read?

Is there an alternative or is Piper the only author willing to take this on?

Also, does Piper discuss Joseph Milteer in his book?

I'm especially interested in him since it's obvious that he was plugged into the plan, and I think he was photographed in Dealey. Plaza.

So as I was snooping around for details on him I found this:

http://www.jfkmontreal.com/joseph_milteer.htm

"After the assassination, Milteer told the same informant, William Somersett, that it was a Jewish conspiracy that sponsored Kennedy’s murder. In fact, Milteer referred to the person in charge as "the big Jew." According to an FBI report, Milteer told Somersett that Martin Luther King and Attorney General Kennedy were now unimportant, but the next move would be against "the big Jew." Milteer described the assassination as "a Communist conspiracy by Jews to overthrow the United States government."(9)

This information is extremely important because Milteer was clearly a man with prior knowledge about the assassination. Despite his extremist politics, Milteer was a person to be taken seriously. His comment about Martin Luther King, Robert Kennedy, and "the big Jew" tells us three things. First, his reference to "the big Jew" corroborates my thesis that one Jewish individual—likely Louis Bloomfield—ran the coup against Kennedy. Second, it reveals that right-wing extre

There are two references to mists broke ranks with the Jewish-led coup immediately after the assassination. Apparently, Milteer and his associates had made a pact with Bloomfield to support the coup but secretly plotted to kill him—Bloomfield—upon completion of the deed. Third, it suggests that contingency plans were in place in 1963—by the right-wing extremists—to kill Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy."

More questions:

Does this information jibe with what you know/believe?

Who is Louis Bloomfield?

Thanks.

Myra,

IMO (Mark can speak very capably for himself) it is worth reading Final Judgment. Very much so.

If you want to get it, you have a number of options including an ebook version that has the advantage of being a searchable PDF file. However, you can't take it to bed, unless you sleep with your computer.

Piper's radio show also deals, from time to time, with the JFK assassination. His show is archived at the RBN website. Free downloads. In the USA, you could listen live on shortwave, I guess, as well as via the web. It's a call in show. Ring him up!

Piper is not an academic or mainstream journalist. He describes himself is a "hack writer with opinions". I think that is excessivly modest, and doesn't do him justice, but readers, especially on the left, need to bear in mind cultural adjustments needed to bridge the gap between populist and liberal discourse (using liberal in the American sense).

From the first publication of Final Judgment in the mid 90s, he was either ignored or savaged by 'mainstream' JFK assassination investigators, both pro- and anti-conspiracy. Deborah Conway, I understand, offered to join a JDL picket to keep him out of a particular event.

In response to attacks, of which he has experienced many, Piper can get rather cross. There is, of course, a quintessential example of this process at work on this forum - see the threads about (mainly attacking) Piper during his brief sojourn on the forum.

...

Thanks for the summary Sid. I'll get it from the library.

I saw Piper's brief sojourn on the forum a few weeks back when I originally got curious about his premise.

I got so turned off by his preemptive belligerence (not his theory, his behavior on the forum) that I backed off.

But I want to judge the material not the man so I'll read the book eventually.

[Michael Hogan]

Thanks for the summary Sid. I'll get it from the library.

I saw Piper's brief sojourn on the forum a few weeks back when I originally got curious about his premise.

I got so turned off by his preemptive belligerence (not his theory, his behavior on the forum) that I backed off.

But I want to judge the material not the man so I'll read the book eventually.

Myra, make sure you read the Sixth Edition which was copyrighted in 2004. Even if one chooses to disagree with Piper's opinions and final conclusions, Final Judgement contains a lot of very good information on President Kennedy's murder, and the footnotes and documentation are quite sound.

[Kathleen Collins]

Myra,

jfkmontreal.com is an absolutely disgraveful website. It is run by someone called Salvador Astucia. He used to post on this forum until he was banned. He labelled John Simkin and Andy Walker as Zionist propagandists on the site, see here, http://www.jfkmontreal.com/ngfl/edforum.htm

The site is thoroughly unreliable. Another page on the site claims that Israel triggered the Tsunami in Asia.

John

About that jfkmontreal.com site. You can tell he's anti-semitic. He also has material on the death of John Lennon. How reliable is that? I've heard from another person to not believe a word he says. Did Jose Perdomo, aka San Genis, a survivor of the Bay of Pigs incident, have something to do with Lennon's killing, as he was the guard that night? Also his description of the Dakota -- is it laid out the way he said it was?

Kathy

Well I won't rule out gov't complicity in the Lennon murder, but I will rule out the jfkmontreal website.

Thanks Kathy. I appreciate the input.

You're welcome, Babe.

Kathy

[Sid Walker]

I find this theory very interesting. There was talk that the Mossad had brought down the World Trade Center and 3 Israelis jumping up and down in glee. This is something I read on the Internet shortly after 9-11. And I recall Arab names not being on the manifest of the flights. There is a lot of info about 9-11 on the Internet. And though I now find it difficult to read or hear about it anymore, I wonder what your opinions are about Israel and 9-11.

And also, was the Mossad behind the Palestinian convicted of killing Senator Robert F. Kennedy in 1968?

Kathy

Hi Kathy

Two threads on this forum that you may find of interest:

The 2000/2001 Israeli US spyring story

Assassination of RFK (especially towards the end of the thread)