Douglas Caddy Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 The hidden government linking group linking JFK, Watergate, Iran-Contra and 9/11 By Peter Dale Scott October 5, 2014 www.whowhatwhy.com http://whowhatwhy.com/2014/10/05/the-hidden-government-group-linking-jfk-watergate-iran-contra-and-911/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Brancato Posted October 9, 2014 Share Posted October 9, 2014 I'm glad you posted this Doug. I found the article on Zite, a news app. Peter Dale Scott is always worth reading, and his thinking has influenced me for decades. He is always careful not to jump to conclusions or fly off the handle on some conspirator or other. He has written about Jack Crichton often, a man who gets scant attention from most writers and researchers. But really, when you think about it, Scott's methodology does not focus on the details like the shooting scenario or the autopsy, but rather on the deeper implications of the crime. The reason for this is obvious. Anyone with a brain knows there was a crossfire, and a conspiracy to cover that up. The only questions that matter are who and why, and the how of it is only important in that context. I wish that we here on this board were more interested in the bigger picture. Perhaps we are, but find it uncomfortable to talk about it. In any case, I thought I would post a response in order to keep the thread alive. I would like board members to talk about continuity of government, about the not so hidden threads running through 'deep' events in our history. I've expressed my view often, usually without response here, that there is a power establishment that takes the long view and does whatever it takes to hold onto their power, that certain families have been central to this conspiracy, such as the Dulles and Bush families, and that today's US government disfunction and global morass is part of a long range plan to divide and conquer in order to enrich their coffers in perpetuity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 (edited) I'm glad you posted this Doug. I found the article on Zite, a news app. Peter Dale Scott is always worth reading, and his thinking has influenced me for decades. He is always careful not to jump to conclusions or fly off the handle on some conspirator or other. He has written about Jack Crichton often, a man who gets scant attention from most writers and researchers. But really, when you think about it, Scott's methodology does not focus on the details like the shooting scenario or the autopsy, but rather on the deeper implications of the crime. The reason for this is obvious. Anyone with a brain knows there was a crossfire, and a conspiracy to cover that up. The only questions that matter are who and why, and the how of it is only important in that context. I wish that we here on this board were more interested in the bigger picture. Perhaps we are, but find it uncomfortable to talk about it. In any case, I thought I would post a response in order to keep the thread alive. I would like board members to talk about continuity of government, about the not so hidden threads running through 'deep' events in our history. I've expressed my view often, usually without response here, that there is a power establishment that takes the long view and does whatever it takes to hold onto their power, that certain families have been central to this conspiracy, such as the Dulles and Bush families, and that today's US government disfunction and global morass is part of a long range plan to divide and conquer in order to enrich their coffers in perpetuity. "Notes on Lunch with Arlen Specter," by Vincent Salandria. http://politicalassassinations.com/2012/11/1560/ I explained that the day after the Kennedy assassination I met with my then brother-in-law, Harold Feldman. We decided that if Oswald was the killer, and if the U.S. government were innocent of any complicity in the assassination, Oswald would live through the weekend. But if he was killed, then we would know that the assassination was a consequence of a high level U.S. government plot. Harold Feldman and I also concluded that if Oswald was killed by a Jew, it would indicate a high level WASP plot. We further decided that the killing of Oswald would signal that no government investigation could upturn the truth. In that event we as private citizens would have to investigate the assassination to arrive at the historical truth. That's one helluva call! "If Oswald was killed by a Jew...high level WASP plot." Who were the highest level US Government blue blood White Anglo-Saxon Protestants on 11/22/63? Averell Harriman -- Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs (#3 man at State) -- Skull & Bones 1913. Mentored Prescott Bush (Skull & Bones'17) in the banking biz. McGeorge Bundy -- National Security Advisor -- Skull & Bones 1940. Richard McGarrah Helms - Deputy Director for Plans Central Intelligence Agency -- grandson of hotshot Rockefeller banker. Peter Dale Scott: I will conclude by again quoting James Mann’s dictum that the Mount Weather COG leadership constitutes a “permanent, though hidden, national security apparatus of the United States, … a world in which Presidents come and go, but America always keeps on fighting.” And I would like this audience to investigate whether elements of this enduring leadership, with its ever-changing mix of CIA veterans and civilian leaders, may have constituted “a secret government-in-waiting,” not just under Clinton in the 1990s, not just under Carter in 1980, but also under Kennedy in November 1963. See above! Edited October 10, 2014 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 (edited) Continuity of Government November 22, 1963: From Spanning the Century: The Life of W. Averell Harriman, by Rudy Abramson, pgs 624-5 (emphasis added) Some of Averell's friends, including [Roger] Hilsman, who had heard Bob Kennedy muse about the possibility ofHarriman as secretary of state, thought there was still a chance that Averell might yet get the Foggy Bottom jobhe long coveted. But that had been before the notorious coup cable [243 authorizing Diem coup 8/24/63].Though the President had avoided criticism of Averell in the episode, Harriman knew Kennedy's confidence in himwas shaken. After working his way to the seventh floor, he was suddenly viewed as a problem. Almost overnight,he looked ten years older. Privately, the President and the attorney general talked of finding a way to rehabilitatehim, to find a job that would get him out of the Vietnam business. There was a need to put more emphasis onhemispheric matters, and the President thought that one way to solve two problems might be to create a new postof undersecretary for Latin American affairs for him.As deeply as the administration had involved itself in the machinations against Diem, Kennedy still appeared stunnedwhen the long-anticipated coup ended with the assassination of Diem and Nhu on November 1. The United States couldtechnically claim that it had been a Vietnamese affair; but the administration had conditioned the atmosphere,beginning with the Harriman-Hilsman cable to Lodge.By that time, Averell was already turning more attention to hemispheric problems. The afternoon of November 22 wasset a side for a meeting with oil company executives about the future of their contracts with the government inArgentina. Beforehand, he went to a Hilsman luncheon for a delegation of politicians from the Phillipines. He wasfinishing his dessert and talking with Senator Frank Church about extremism in American politics when Church wascalled to the telephone. A minute later, the senator rushed back into the room, his face ashen. The President hadbeen shot, and was feared dead. There was a moment of silence, and then turmoil, shouted questions, and people gettingup from the table to head for telephones. Averell hadn't heard; and when Church repeated the news, his reaction wasthat it couldn't be true. "No, sir, I'm not joking," said Church.Averell heard the shattering confirmation of Kennedy's death in George Ball's office moments later. So undone thathe could only think of nothing else to do, he convened his oil meeting, but it lasted only a few minutes. When anexecutive tastelessly suggested an urgent approach to the new President to write the government of Argentina in behalfof American oil interests, he adjourned in disgust.He spent the afternoon helping Ball, who was, if anyone truly was, running the United States government, since Rusk andseveral other Cabinet members were airborne, coming home after turning back from a flight to the Far East. As darknessfell, Averell drove out to Andrews Air Force Base with Ball and Alexis Johnson, joining the official mourning partystanding silently on the floodlit ramp as the President's casket was lowered from the rear door of Air Force One.The following days were a blur of meetings and trips to airports to greet delegations arriving from all over the worldfor the state funeral. While Rusk and Ball attended to ceremonial duties, Harriman sat down with visitors who broughturgent diplomatic problems with them--an insurgency developing against the government in the Dominican Republic,intelligence warnings of political upheaval in Brazil, and signs of new trouble between India and Pakistan over Kashmir... Edited October 10, 2014 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 Document 4: US Embassy in France cable 3199 to Department of State, 8 January 1964, Secret Source: National Archives Record Group 59, Department of State Records Subject-Numeric File, 1964-1966 (hereinafter SN 64-66 with file name) Inco-Uranium This telegram, sent through the special "Roger Channel" used for intelligence subjects, refers to an earlier embassy message, number 2319, dated 12 Novembe 1963, which has yet to be found at the U.S. National Archives. That telegram may refer to French actions to halt the supply of uranium to Israel which were alluded to indirectly in this message. Much still needs to be learned about the details, but apparently in the spring of 1963, the French Foreign Ministry cut off the uranium supply to Israel in order to stop the nuclear program. [5] Jacques Martin, a French Foreign Ministry expert on nuclear matters, told U.S. embassy officials that the Israelis, who had refused to sign an agreement to purchase uranium exclusively from France, were looking for other sources, most likely Belgium and Argentina. Martin stated that the Dimona reactor could continue operations for only a few weeks without a supply of reactor fuel. It is worth noting that the U .S. government had recently learned that the reactor had just become critical and thus capable of producing plutonium. http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nukevault/ebb432/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglas Caddy Posted October 10, 2014 Author Share Posted October 10, 2014 https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=bmYZ_kWHk3Q John Stockwell speaking in 1989 on the Deep State. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Hancock Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 There is a good deal of important background on COG, in both government documents and histories. Actually Eisenhower started it informally, sending letters to a number of trusted individuals essentially giving them authority to take over sections of the government and reboot them following a nuclear attack. JFK was especially concerned following the Cuban missile crisis and was the first president to issue a set of executive orders to actually initiate most of the COG activities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Mady Posted October 10, 2014 Share Posted October 10, 2014 Daniel Sheehan Presents Conspiracy Theories and the UFO Phenomenon http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRH4WcjVdwY Believe it or not Daniel Sheehan gave a presentation to a UFO conference that focused on conspiracy, IMO Mr. Sheehan reveals the connections from JFK assassination - NIXON - Watergate. I highly recommend this presentation to explain the involvement of NIXON and the significance of Watergate in connection to the JFK assassination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Brancato Posted October 11, 2014 Share Posted October 11, 2014 It's a very scary story that Sheehan weaves herein, full of personal stories that ring true. His take on John Kerry explains a lot. Well, Kerry is Skull and Bones, and he surely plays ball when he has to. His Iran Contra hearings were a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Hancock Posted October 11, 2014 Share Posted October 11, 2014 Paul, I would beg to differ on the Kerry Hearings. I've read the hearings material in great detail as well as the responses that it forced out of various government agencies. Just on the aircraft/drug carrier topic along it made a very solid case for drug running not only by the Contras but an acceptance of it by North and company. As a matter of fact, the committees work laid the groundwork for a later admission by the CIA's own Inspector General of a deal between CIA and Justice authorizing it. Just because that happened a decade later and the media didn't cover it and nobody else has written about it does not mean that the original investigation didn't develop some solid information - its one of the few instances we have of actual Congressional oversight working to at least some extent. I cover all of that in "Shadow Warfare" but my impression is that hard research has become way too dull and books like that get little attention beside the sort of material in Sheehan's story's. Its easy enough to write that sort of material - having studied UFO's for over 30 years I'm pretty familiar with that subject. I should probably keep my mouth shut on this but I'm increasingly frustrated by the extent to which actual historical research has now devolved into lots of stories that simply "ring true". No offense intended, now that I have that off my chest I probably had better just go off and play in my own little ball park... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Andrews Posted October 11, 2014 Share Posted October 11, 2014 (edited) Larry, I did read Shadow Warfare and found it invaluable to understanding both Iran-Contra and 9/11, and your developmental history since WW II to be essential reading on procedure under politics. I have meant to compliment you on this, and to recommend Shadow Warfare to all on the Forum. Edited October 11, 2014 by David Andrews Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Hancock Posted October 11, 2014 Share Posted October 11, 2014 Thank you David, that is much appreciated! I'm not really trying to sell the book - history books don't sell all that well anyway - although obviously I would like to see more people read it. And I know its pretty dense and not an easy read - even with the help of three different editors. The subject is a deep one and I tend towards excessive detail (disclaimer...grin). The book has not gotten any real discussion here, but then neither did NEXUS. I think my real frustration is that over the last couple of decades, I've seen an immense trove of real historical data emerge form government archives and good oral history work - but the discussion trends have been away from actual data (such as the data Bill Simpich used for his most recent work) and towards promotion of more spectacular but much more entertaining conspiracy "stories". As I mentioned separately, it reflects what happened to the History channel and to a more dangerous extent what has happened to American news media. Every story is pitched around a political world view, around sensationalism (you knew you were in trouble when CNN named a segment "the situation room"...like all news has to be breaking and probably dangerous). And it seems to me everyone is simply looking for information their own supports their political, historical or world view. As an example of that, for the past four or five years, I get probably eight or nine forwarded emails or Facebook posts a day on news items (almost all political or religious oriented) that can quickly be shown to be either only partially true or totally false. Yet only in one instance, upon responding to the originator of a message, has anyone ever acknowledged their was a problem with what they were forwarding to hundreds of people and in no instance has any sender (including actual friends) ever issued a retraction or passed my factual information back. This probably sounds like a rant but my main message was not about Shadow Warfare or even the Kerry hearings, it was about the apparent death of rational skepticism. As for me, I suppose I just need to suck it up....I have a new manuscript with my publisher, no final contract yet but it may be out in 2015. It deals with surprise attacks on the United States, from 1941 to the present - in the areas of warnings intelligence, preparedness and command and control. It is fairly controversial and is not kind to most administrations or either political party (as Shadow Warfare was not) but I'm not sure it will get into print because frankly its not sensational enough for the current market. We'll see. -- did I mention earlier that my wife says I'm now a full fledged curmudgeon? Larry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted October 11, 2014 Share Posted October 11, 2014 (edited) Paul, I would beg to differ on the Kerry Hearings. I've read the hearings material in great detail as well as the responses that it forced out of various government agencies. Just on the aircraft/drug carrier topic along it made a very solid case for drug running not only by the Contras but an acceptance of it by North and company. As a matter of fact, the committees work laid the groundwork for a later admission by the CIA's own Inspector General of a deal between CIA and Justice authorizing it. Just because that happened a decade later and the media didn't cover it and nobody else has written about it does not mean that the original investigation didn't develop some solid information - its one of the few instances we have of actual Congressional oversight working to at least some extent. I cover all of that in "Shadow Warfare" but my impression is that hard research has become way too dull and books like that get little attention beside the sort of material in Sheehan's story's. Its easy enough to write that sort of material - having studied UFO's for over 30 years I'm pretty familiar with that subject. I should probably keep my mouth shut on this but I'm increasingly frustrated by the extent to which actual historical research has now devolved into lots of stories that simply "ring true". No offense intended, now that I have that off my chest I probably had better just go off and play in my own little ball park... I recall that there were reports of redactions concerning BCCI and MI6 in Kerry hearings. ==== see http://www.historycommons.org/searchResults.jsp?searchtext=BCCI&events=on&entities=on&articles=on&topics=on&timelines=on&projects=on&titles=on&descriptions=on&dosearch=on&search=Go Edited October 11, 2014 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Hancock Posted October 11, 2014 Share Posted October 11, 2014 Oh there were definitely redaction's all over the place....but far more important (as usual) was the intentional withholding of information. The most egregious example of that was the concealment of an agreement between the CIA Director and the Attorney General to allow the CIA not to report drug dealing among its Contra assets. Its unclear how far down the agreement was communicated internally but it certainly gave Contra figures a free hand and allowed the CIA simply to distance itself from what they were doing, as well as preventing reports to DEA. The CIA's own Inspector General exposed that agreement something like a decade later and it got virtually no media coverage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted October 11, 2014 Share Posted October 11, 2014 hidden government ? WAS GARY WEBB SUICIDED TO KILL NEW BOOK? By: Blacklistednews The movie Kill the Messenger on Gary Webb debuts in movie theaters across the United States today. Questions still remain as to whether the Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, who was betrayed by his colleagues for his brave investigative work, wasn’t “suicided” by the very forces whose crimes he endeavored to expose.-JFT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now