Jump to content
The Education Forum

Political Assassinations


Recommended Posts

Interesting article by Ian Mosley in the Israel News today. Although it is mainly about the threat to Barack Obama it does consider the idea of political assassinations in history, including that of JFK.

http://www.israelenews.com/view.asp?ID=2216

Ever since the Middle Ages, there has always been one act which has been strictly prohibited. It is forbidden to speak of the death of the King.

British Communist and Nobel Laureate Doris Lessing is 88 years old, and has either decided she’s old enough to disregard the taboo, or else she’s gone senile and has forgotten this taboo exists. Lessing told an interviewer for a Swedish newspaper that ‘If Barack Obama becomes the next US president he will surely be assassinated.’ Obama, who is vying to become the first black president in US history, ‘would certainly not last long, a black man in the position of president. They would murder him,’ Lessing, 88, told the Dagens Nyheter daily.”

The article goes on: “Lessing, who won the 2007 Nobel Literature Prize, said it might be better if Obama’s Democratic rival Hillary Clinton were to succeed in her bid to become the first woman president of the United States. ‘The best thing would be if they (Clinton and Obama) were to run together. Hillary is a very sharp lady. It might be calmer if she were to win, and not Obama,’ she said.”

Ms. Lessing is delusional if she thinks Obama will be assassinated by the Klan.

The US Government stamped out any organized illegal activity by the Klan and similar organizations decades ago. The Feds have gone on to persecute and harass LEGAL pro-White organizations to this day. Lessing is completely wrong about a threat from any racialist organization, but there may be other threats out there much more real.

Most assassinations in recent history have been done by rogue elements in our government or the MOSSAD. One little known fact is that JFK had opposed Israel’s secret nuclear weapons program while his successor Lyndon Johnson turned a blind eye to it (and even refused to allow US carrier aircraft to shoot down Israeli fighters attacking the USS Liberty).

The patsy for the JFK assassination, Lee Harvey Oswald, refused to go down quietly. Oswald was loudly protesting that he was a patsy during his two days in jail. Oswald was himself assassinated two days after JFK by Jack Ruby (formerly Jacob Rubenstein). The assassination of Bobby Kennedy by Sirhan Sirhan appeared to be an early mind-control assassination, meant to create hostility between the US and Palestinians.

Arlen Spector (now a quasi-Republican Senator) invented the “single-bullet theory” to help cover up the JFK assassination. Lyndon Johnson appointed Gerald Ford to head the investigation even though Johnson considered Ford a bungling incompetent. Ford was later the target of two assassination attempts after he was appointed president with vice president Nelson Rockefeller.

Established governments almost never in the past used assassination as a tool until the rise of mind-control assassination techniques. Even then, assassination appeared to be largely a tool by rogue elements of the CIA to eliminate political undesirables within the US. Only the Israelis appear inclined to assassinate foreign politicians since they are immune from criticism in the Western press, and the MOSSAD has been largely successful at blaming certain terrorist events and assassinations on the Muslims.

The Bush and Clinton crime families seem to have their own private assassins working for them. The Clintons left a body trail from Arkansas to Washington, DC. A remarkable number of finance managers for the Clintons died mysteriously –burying any evidence of illegal mob money or foreign donors. Vince Foster famously wound up dead in a park while Clinton operatives ransacked his office. Commerce Secretary Ron Brown, who threatened to go public about Clinton criminal activities, conveniently died as Air Force Two flew into a mountain in Croatia.

George H.W. Bush was vice president for Ronald Reagan, who was shot only two months after becoming president. The shooter, John Hinckley was the son of a major contributor to the Bush campaign. John Hinckley’s brother, Scott was going to have dinner with Bush’s son, Neil, the day of the shooting. George H.W. Bush had earlier been head of the CIA, which was rumored to be experimenting with mind-control assassinations. Perhaps, the younger Hinckley brother was seen as a weak-minded individual, who could be molded into such an assassin.

In the case of George W. Bush, a highly inconvenient woman, Margie Schoedinger, who dated Bush back in Texas, complained in 2002 that she had been kidnapped, drugged and raped. The police actually confirmed that Bush had dated Schoedinger years earlier, but this story never gained national attention. Margie Schoedinger was a Black woman, and Bush’s reputation as a normal, acceptable sort of guy would have been badly shaken if his predilection for dating Black women had become public. Schoedinger actually filed a lawsuit against George Bush claiming that he was behind the drugging and kidnapping. Margie Schoedinger was found dead shortly afterwards in 2003, and no one in the mainstream media has bothered to focus any attention on this death.

And what lies ahead for Barack Hussein Obama? There is widespread suspicion that he will be assassinated during the primary much like Robert Kennedy, clearing the way for Hillary. The assassination of a political candidate is much more forgettable than someone, who goes on to become president. If the Israelis carried out the mind-control assassination of Bobby Kennedy in 1968, then they may be brainwashing another Palestinian (or Saudi or Egyptian) even now. It would be very hard to imagine the Israelis tolerating an American president with the middle name “Hussein.” One key benefit for the Israelis is the fact that most Americans would suspect that Hillary was behind the assassination and not them.

It’s highly possible a significant number of Americans would vote against Hillary if an assassination took place since many would suspect she had a role in it. This could produce a victory for the otherwise unelectable John McCain. The Israelis don’t care if Hillary or McCain becomes president. Both are equally pro-Israel.

If Hillary is ordering the assassination, she will pull it off until it becomes necessary. If she can defeat Obama in the primary, then there’s no point in assassinating him. Hillary may resort to massive vote-stealing to win as she apparently did in New Hampshire.

In view of the high body count associated in the past with people who got in the way of Bill and Hillary Clinton, if I were Obama, I’d be ordering a set of Kevlar underwear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting article by Ian Mosley in the Israel News today. Although it is mainly about the threat to Barack Obama it does consider the idea of political assassinations in history, including that of JFK.

http://www.israelenews.com/view.asp?ID=2216

Ever since the Middle Ages, there has always been one act which has been strictly prohibited. It is forbidden to speak of the death of the King.

British Communist and Nobel Laureate Doris Lessing is 88 years old, and has either decided she’s old enough to disregard the taboo, or else she’s gone senile and has forgotten this taboo exists. Lessing told an interviewer for a Swedish newspaper that ‘If Barack Obama becomes the next US president he will surely be assassinated.’ Obama, who is vying to become the first black president in US history, ‘would certainly not last long, a black man in the position of president. They would murder him,’ Lessing, 88, told the Dagens Nyheter daily.”

The article goes on: “Lessing, who won the 2007 Nobel Literature Prize, said it might be better if Obama’s Democratic rival Hillary Clinton were to succeed in her bid to become the first woman president of the United States. ‘The best thing would be if they (Clinton and Obama) were to run together. Hillary is a very sharp lady. It might be calmer if she were to win, and not Obama,’ she said.”

Ms. Lessing is delusional if she thinks Obama will be assassinated by the Klan.

The US Government stamped out any organized illegal activity by the Klan and similar organizations decades ago. The Feds have gone on to persecute and harass LEGAL pro-White organizations to this day. Lessing is completely wrong about a threat from any racialist organization, but there may be other threats out there much more real.

Most assassinations in recent history have been done by rogue elements in our government or the MOSSAD. One little known fact is that JFK had opposed Israel’s secret nuclear weapons program while his successor Lyndon Johnson turned a blind eye to it (and even refused to allow US carrier aircraft to shoot down Israeli fighters attacking the USS Liberty).

The patsy for the JFK assassination, Lee Harvey Oswald, refused to go down quietly. Oswald was loudly protesting that he was a patsy during his two days in jail. Oswald was himself assassinated two days after JFK by Jack Ruby (formerly Jacob Rubenstein). The assassination of Bobby Kennedy by Sirhan Sirhan appeared to be an early mind-control assassination, meant to create hostility between the US and Palestinians.

Arlen Spector (now a quasi-Republican Senator) invented the “single-bullet theory” to help cover up the JFK assassination. Lyndon Johnson appointed Gerald Ford to head the investigation even though Johnson considered Ford a bungling incompetent. Ford was later the target of two assassination attempts after he was appointed president with vice president Nelson Rockefeller.

Established governments almost never in the past used assassination as a tool until the rise of mind-control assassination techniques. Even then, assassination appeared to be largely a tool by rogue elements of the CIA to eliminate political undesirables within the US. Only the Israelis appear inclined to assassinate foreign politicians since they are immune from criticism in the Western press, and the MOSSAD has been largely successful at blaming certain terrorist events and assassinations on the Muslims.

The Bush and Clinton crime families seem to have their own private assassins working for them. The Clintons left a body trail from Arkansas to Washington, DC. A remarkable number of finance managers for the Clintons died mysteriously –burying any evidence of illegal mob money or foreign donors. Vince Foster famously wound up dead in a park while Clinton operatives ransacked his office. Commerce Secretary Ron Brown, who threatened to go public about Clinton criminal activities, conveniently died as Air Force Two flew into a mountain in Croatia.

George H.W. Bush was vice president for Ronald Reagan, who was shot only two months after becoming president. The shooter, John Hinckley was the son of a major contributor to the Bush campaign. John Hinckley’s brother, Scott was going to have dinner with Bush’s son, Neil, the day of the shooting. George H.W. Bush had earlier been head of the CIA, which was rumored to be experimenting with mind-control assassinations. Perhaps, the younger Hinckley brother was seen as a weak-minded individual, who could be molded into such an assassin.

In the case of George W. Bush, a highly inconvenient woman, Margie Schoedinger, who dated Bush back in Texas, complained in 2002 that she had been kidnapped, drugged and raped. The police actually confirmed that Bush had dated Schoedinger years earlier, but this story never gained national attention. Margie Schoedinger was a Black woman, and Bush’s reputation as a normal, acceptable sort of guy would have been badly shaken if his predilection for dating Black women had become public. Schoedinger actually filed a lawsuit against George Bush claiming that he was behind the drugging and kidnapping. Margie Schoedinger was found dead shortly afterwards in 2003, and no one in the mainstream media has bothered to focus any attention on this death.

And what lies ahead for Barack Hussein Obama? There is widespread suspicion that he will be assassinated during the primary much like Robert Kennedy, clearing the way for Hillary. The assassination of a political candidate is much more forgettable than someone, who goes on to become president. If the Israelis carried out the mind-control assassination of Bobby Kennedy in 1968, then they may be brainwashing another Palestinian (or Saudi or Egyptian) even now. It would be very hard to imagine the Israelis tolerating an American president with the middle name “Hussein.” One key benefit for the Israelis is the fact that most Americans would suspect that Hillary was behind the assassination and not them.

It’s highly possible a significant number of Americans would vote against Hillary if an assassination took place since many would suspect she had a role in it. This could produce a victory for the otherwise unelectable John McCain. The Israelis don’t care if Hillary or McCain becomes president. Both are equally pro-Israel.

If Hillary is ordering the assassination, she will pull it off until it becomes necessary. If she can defeat Obama in the primary, then there’s no point in assassinating him. Hillary may resort to massive vote-stealing to win as she apparently did in New Hampshire.

In view of the high body count associated in the past with people who got in the way of Bill and Hillary Clinton, if I were Obama, I’d be ordering a set of Kevlar underwear.

There are many unusual things about this article. Not the least is that it is written by Ian Mosley a well known white supremacist and published in an Israeli magazine of all places. Well............. :tomatoes Ian Mosley does not appear in the list of regular or occasional contributors to the magazine. Though there are plenty of other racists there amongst other more moderates. Mosley's link takes one here: http://www.stevepavlina.com/forums/world-a...nate-obama.html

Don't quite know what to make of that.

I also see that our Len is also a reader and responder to the Mosley article. (it is you, isn't it, Len? I mean, how many Lens in Recife, Brazil can there be who might also read the Israel News?)

Nevertheless, despite Mosley having a serious and questionable agenda there, much of what he says is interesting and true and it is unusual to see published in one article like this.

I do wonder if anyone has done a study of political assassinations in general of say the last 50 or 100 years. Where are all the lone assassins outside the 1960's? Most assassins in history have been politically motivated and the act involves planning and organisation by several sometimes many others. Like Lenin's brother and the attempted assassination of Czar Alexander 3rd. Like Gavrilo Princip. Like Gandhi. Like Allende. One person may pull the trigger or plant the bomb but behind them there are many involved in the planning and execution of any assassination. What is the ratio of lone nut assassinations to 'normal' ones, for want of a better word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The protection of Obama has been the largest undiscussed issue of the primaries -- that is, until Hillary shoved her foot into her mouth with a statement about everyone remembering that RFK was assassinated just after the California primary in June. I can only hope that her statement is in no way prophetic and, even worse, that she has no awareness of any agenda that may be in the works.

In addition, I was quite horrified by Bush's statements at the Israeli Knesset, as they seemed to throw down a gauntlet to Israel, implying that if Obama wins and doesn't do what the Israeli's want, they have every right to take him out. Hopefully, this will not be the case, and my reaction is too severe, but only time will tell, unfortunately.

In February, when Obama spoke in Minneapolis, there was quite good security, people checking our handbags, throwing away all water bottles, etc. However, in Texas, some weeks later, there was none, as people were rushed through the gates. This week Barak and Michelle will be at the Excel Center in St Paul. It will be interesting to observe the processes at work there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope this isn't off-topic. I haven't been here for awhile. While reading a link that Peter Lemkin supplied about the Kennedy Assassinations, this passage from G. Gordon Liddy's book WILL struck me as to what MI6 did to Princess Diana:

"Dr. Gunn [suggested] a technique used successfully abroad. It involved catching the target's moving automobile in a turn or sharp curve and hitting it with another car on the outside rear quarter. According to Dr. Gunn, if the angle of the blow and the relative speeds of the two vehicles were correct, the target vehicle would flip over, crash, and, usually, burn." (p.207-208)"

Kathy Collins

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While political assassination, as a subject, is certainly taboo in many circles, the harping on possible motives, most demonstratably false, and is a waste of time, but it really is assanine to suggest that Hillary would be a natural suspect if Obama gets wacked.

BK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Mosely regarding Mossad's involvement in the deaths of JFK and RFK, although I think the era of wholesale US political assassinations is in the past. For political assassinations to succeed in the present day era, it would require present day equivalents of LBJ and JEH to be prominent in American public life. These two, along with the US media, were the main architects of the coverup and suppression of evidence, imo, and without high level domestic co-ordination of the all important coverup, then no assassination plan can proceed.

Of course, should Obama prove to be the real deal---and all indications are that he is---then present day equivalents of these two characters may be found and positioned accordingly. It would need to be a plot of fiendish cleverness because in Obama's case, unlike that of JFK and RFK, a highly skeptical and well informed section of the public are in nervous anticipation of just such an event. The plotters would not have the element of surprise on their side this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This idea that assassins are always part of some right-wing plot or power grab is incorrect. Last year I read a book on the history of Anarchism. A number of world leaders were killed between 1870 and 1920 by single-assassins fueled by Anarchism. Most of them used bombs. Capitalism at that time was far more oppressive than today, and even more oppressive than it will likely become in the near future. Many among the lower 80% felt they were part of a slave class, and had no hope. It wasn't much of a leap from there to think it perfectly reasonable to kill authority figures and force the survivors to take notice. People like J. Edgar Hoover rose to power as a direct response to this threat. Which could be one of the reasons he so readily believed Oswald killed Kennedy because...because he hated America.

The problem with that theory is that Oswald didn't fit the profile. Not only was Oswald married with children, he, unlike earlier anarchist assassins, failed to admit his guilt and proclaim the reasons for his crime. Perhaps, as speculated by Norman Mailer, Oswald was hoping to have a show trial, at which he would have taken the stand and proclaimed his reasons. But why wait? He would never have had as big an audience as he had before the cameras in Dallas. It doesn't really fly.

P.S. I just noticed that Obama made a special visit today to speak to a pro-Israel lobby and tell them they have nothing to fear from him. Hmmm... Maybe he's afraid of them...

Edited by Pat Speer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

P.S. I just noticed that Obama made a special visit today to speak to a pro-Israel lobby and tell them they have nothing to fear from him. Hmmm... Maybe he's afraid of them...

I'll bet he is, Pat---and the fear would be mutual, I suspect.

I saw snippets of that AIPAC rally, too. I couldn't help notice HRC's speech was almost apologetic in tone and concluded with 'Barack Obama will be a great friend to Israel'. We'll see. Perhaps Obama will tolerate an elephant in the living room or perhaps he won't.

p.s. the AIPAC symbol is interesting---an intriguing blend of the Israeli and US flags.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Mosely regarding Mossad's involvement in the deaths of JFK and RFK, although I think the era of wholesale US political assassinations is in the past. For political assassinations to succeed in the present day era, it would require present day equivalents of LBJ and JEH to be prominent in American public life. These two, along with the US media, were the main architects of the coverup and suppression of evidence, imo, and without high level domestic co-ordination of the all important coverup, then no assassination plan can proceed.

Of course, should Obama prove to be the real deal---and all indications are that he is---then present day equivalents of these two characters may be found and positioned accordingly. It would need to be a plot of fiendish cleverness because in Obama's case, unlike that of JFK and RFK, a highly skeptical and well informed section of the public are in nervous anticipation of just such an event. The plotters would not have the element of surprise on their side this time.

Just because people are a little more aware of political assassinations is not any protection. The press would ignore the truth. The government would not do a proper investigation. All that has changed in that regard is that things have worsened.

So Obama, should he become the next president, will have to do a most careful dance. Change, but not so much that the powers that truly be decide to take him out.

Dawn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This idea that assassins are always part of some right-wing plot or power grab is incorrect. Last year I read a book on the history of Anarchism. A number of world leaders were killed between 1870 and 1920 by single-assassins fueled by Anarchism.

It's arguable that an Anarchist Lone Nutter theory formed around the time of Joseph Conrad's "The Secret Agent", which has always been a highly controversial and misunderstood book - like much of Conrad's fantastic oevre.

A classic "Anarchist assassin" is Gavrilo Princip but, as John's Spartacus pages show, Princip was actually a member of a secret society, the Black Hand, and there were at least six other conspirators involved in the assassination of Franz Ferdinand.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/FWWblackhand.htm

Also, Anarchists tend to be part of a group, and those groups are routinely penetrated by everyone from spies to agent provocateurs.

It is a myth that the left have been involved in killing right-wing politicians. There are ideological reasons for this. The left believe that you have to change the capitalist system. Killing individual politicians will have no impact on changing the system. One right-wing politician will only be replaced by another right-wing politician. That is why the idea that Oswald killed JFK as a result of his political ideology is ridiculous. What was gained by replacing JFK with LBJ?

The only case I can think of in America was the case of Alexander Berkman. He was the son of a wealthy Jewish businessman, was born in Vilna, Russia on 21st November, 1870. Both his parents died when he was young and at the age of eighteen decided to emigrate to the United States.

In New York City Berkman met and lived with Emma Goldman, a Russian immigrant who was working in a clothing factory. Berkman and Goldman both became involved in the campaign to free the men convicted of the Haymarket Bombing. They were also influenced by the anarchist writings of Johann Most.

In 1892 Berkman and Goldman started a small business in Worcester, Massachusetts, providing lunches for local workers. Later that year Amalgamated Iron and Steel Workers Union called out its members at the Steel Homestead plant owned by Henry Frick and Andrew Carnegie. Frick took the controversial decision to employ 300 strikebreakers from the Pinkerton Detective Agency. The men were brought in on armed barges down the Monongahela River. The strikers were waiting for them and a day long battle took place. Ten men were killed and 60 wounded before the governor obtained order by placing Homestead under martial law.

Berkman was appalled by Frick's behaviour and decided to make a dramatic gesture against capitalism. After gaining entry into his office, Berkman shot Henry Frick three times and stabbed him twice. However, Frick survived the attack and made a full-recovery. Found guilty of attempted murder, Berkman spent the next fourteen years in Pennsylvania's Western Penitentiary.

Released in 1906 Berkman and Emma Goldman established themselves as the leaders of the anarchist movement in the United States. They published the radical journal, Mother Earth and books such as Goldman's Anarchism and Other Essays (1910) and Berkman's Prison Memoirs of an Anarchist (1912). They also helped organize industrial disputes such as the Lawrence Textile Strike.

On the outbreak of the First World War both Berkman and Emma Goldman became involved in the campaign to keep the United States out of the conflict. Berkman moved to San Francisco and in January, 1916, started a new anarchist journal, Blast. When five months later a bomb went off killing six people in the city. The authorities suspected that the bomb had been planted by anti-war campaigners and Berkman was arrested but later released. Thomas Mooney, a local trade union leader was falsely convicted of the offence but spent the next twenty-three years in prison before being released. It is almost certain that the bomb was planted by the authorities who wanted to justify the harsh treatment of left-wing activists.

The USA declared war on the Central Powers in 1917. When Berkman campaigned against conscription he was arrested and charged with violating the Espionage Act. Under this act it was an offence to publish material that undermined the war effort. Berkman was found guilty and sentenced to two years in prison. When released in December, 1919, both Berkman and Emma Goldman were deported to Russia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Although there are dozens if not hundreds of associations and academic societies dedicated to the study of democracy, more governments have changed hands as a result of political assassination than democracy, yet there is no institutionalized study of political assassination.

The Gerald Ford Presidential library once announced that it was establishing a center for the study of political assassination, but shortly thereafter decided they didn't really want to do that.

Washington D.C., the city of assassins, would be the perfet place for such a research center, and a Center for the Study of Political Assassinations could actually have an influence on the nature of assassinations.

BK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...
Although there are dozens if not hundreds of associations and academic societies dedicated to the study of democracy, more governments have changed hands as a result of political assassination than democracy, yet there is no institutionalized study of political assassination.

The Gerald Ford Presidential library once announced that it was establishing a center for the study of political assassination, but shortly thereafter decided they didn't really want to do that.

Washington D.C., the city of assassins, would be the perfet place for such a research center, and a Center for the Study of Political Assassinations could actually have an influence on the nature of assassinations.

BK

The John F. Kennedy Center for the Study of Political Assassinations (JFK CSPA)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Following the late-19th-century European and Russian assassinations came the Oswald prototype Leon Czolgosz, who shot McKinley and put TR in the WH. Czolgosz came from poor immigrants and frequently had to return to his lonely room on the family farm, depressive over his latest job failure in the cities. But in the year before the Pan-American Exposition, Czolgosz was in New York buying drinks, accusing oligarchs, and talking up his assassination plan, making the paroled Berkman and his companion, Emma Goldman, suspicious at his attempts to ingratiate himself with them.

McKinley was hesitant at all the adventures in imperialist abandon he was compelled to endorse, and was bankrolled by Ohio senator and ruthless shipping millionaire Mark Hanna, perhaps a thorn in the sides of Rockefeller and Morgan.

Edited by David Andrews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was an ouster of Hanna and his man, in favor of an uber-Americanist and poster boy for Imperialism, a crypto-Populist who came from oldish New York money. Somebody made a cut in favor of style, at a time when coinage, money metals, inflation, farmers' and laborers' rights and anti-trust were at a crisis point. McKinley, I fear, was seen as a ditherer instead of a go-ahead man.

Edited by David Andrews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...