Jump to content
The Education Forum

Why is the JFK assassination research community so easy on Nixon?


Recommended Posts

Guest Mark Valenti

Philosophically, each individual is who he or she is only by virtue of the amount of Freedom that is guaranteed to that person by his or her Government.

Really? You are only yourself because the Government allows you to be Paul Trejo?

Poor you.

Whatever amount of Freedom that our nation can guarantee, we as individuals owe everything that we are to our Form of Government. Therefore -- by rational right -- we owe our Duty to our Government -- including Military Duty.

Not if it is abundantly clear that military actions are criminal in nature.

Even in such a controversial war as LBJ's Vietnam War, which Nixon struggled so painfully to wind down, we must recognize that these were our Elected Leaders, and their all-too-human opinions had led us to War -- and the price for our Government Decisions could be Military Duty -- even as draftees -- in an Unpopular War.

You gloss over the fact that Nixon committed treason by prolonging the war. Oh how painful his struggle to wind the war down must have been.

We were Free Men and Women, doing our best when our Leaders were doing their best -- even through all the mistakes.

This is an extremely naive position, given what we now know about the perpetuation of the Vietnam War.

No soldier is "fodder". All soldiers are loyal servants of their Government, for better or worse.

Every soldier is fodder. They are numbers on a page. Some of them volunteer to be human fodder, others are forced by draft or by lack of options. When their bodies are returned, there is great pomp and ceremony. Their families are given a neatly folded flag and thanked for their sacrifice. And then that dead human being is tallied, along with the others, as the cost of freedom.

In reality, wars are begun for reasons that have nothing to do with national security. Each soldier is precisely the same to war's managers as a boot or a bullet. They are items to be purchased and used.

Name a post-World War 2 American conflict that was about freedom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 131
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

More Vietnam vets have committed suicide than had died during the conflict. Paul Trejo calls the war a "great waste."

And now we know that Richard Nixon committed treason by interfering with the peace process under LBJ for his own selfish political gain.

Every soldier that died from 1969 forward was killed because of Nixon. They were indeed fodder for his own gain.

Soldiers join the military for a variety of reasons. Those reasons exist at the very bottom of the food chain.

Human beings above them make decisions about their very lives. If 20 soldiers have to be killed in order to secure a village, so be it.

Who cares if that same village - five years later - will house a strip mall with a dry cleaner and a convenience store? Who cares if - five years later - those enemy combatants will be our allies in another conflict?

At the time, the generals wanted that goddamn village, so to hell with the lives of the soldiers.

It's a chess game with real lives.

Fodder.

You're entitled to your opinion, Mark. Nevertheless, I think that Brian's thread implies the question of the JFK murder.

What's your opinion about Nixon's possible involvement in the JFK murder?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mark Valenti

Although national tracking of veteran suicide rates is unreliable at best, the VA estimates that 22 veterans commit suicide each day. This means approximately 8,030 veterans kill themselves every year, more than 5,540 of whom are 50 or older. (http://www.nationaljournal.com/defense/why-are-so-many-older-veterans-committing-suicide-20140413)

A 2004 study by a team led by researchers from the National Center for Environmental Health looked at numbers going back to 1965, and found that the suicide rate among Vietnam veterans in the five years after they were discharged was 34.5 per 100,000. For ex-military personnel who served after that war ended, the equivalent number was just 20.1. (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2011/09/are_veterans_more_suicidal_than_ever.html)

Since 1975, nearly three times as many Vietnam veterans have committed suicide than were killed in the war. Fifty-eight-thousand-plus Americans died in the Vietnam War. Over 150,000 have committed suicide since the war ended. (http://winoverptsd.com/wp/category/disturbing-facts-about-vietnam-veterans/)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark Valenti - I find myself in agreement with much of what you say. Likewise Don Jeffries. So when Mark, in response to Don's assertion that many icons on the so-called left are intelligence connected, and that they don't actually challenge the power structure on issues like JFK, mentions Mae Brussell or Paul Krassner as some kind of proof that Don's complaint is wrong, it only serve to undermine Mark's credibility. Come on Mark - surely you know how ridiculous your example was.

Have any of you read Weird Scenes From the Canyon? Don, if you haven't I am sure you will enjoy it. The basic premise of the book is that the Laurel Canyon Los Angeles music scene was in some way in part an intelligence operation.

Mark - controlling the opposition by infiltration is at least as old as Rome. Take a careful look at the 'apostle' Paul and tell me what you see. And you might want to read Acid Dreams for some background into the CIA and LSD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mark Valenti

Paul Brancato - Surely you don't endorse Don's complaint that the Beatles never railed against the Warren Report? That, to me, is what was ridiculous about that whole exchange.

The counterculture took it for granted that they were being lied to. If it came out of Washington, it was BS. So there was no real need to highlight the Warren Report, it was rejected even before it was bound in leather. It was just another in a string of lies.

Who controlled Mario Savio? Who pressed the buttons of Eldridge Cleaver? How about Bobby Seale? John Froines? Rennie Davis? Were they all manipulated? Yes there were infiltrators, everybody knows that. But the entire peace movement *controlled* by nefarious forces? Please.

And fwiw, Paul Krassner was a key cultural figure, praised by everyone from Kurt Vonnegut to John Lennon. He satirized the Establishment mercilessly and, contrary to whatever you may think about him, his comedic barbs did more damage to the credibility of the ruling class than any liberal newspaper pundit ever did.

Edited by Mark Valenti
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I observed, college students in the mid- to late-1960s thought the Warren Report was a big lie. Few students knew much about the assassination but most knew about the grassy knoll, the ridiculous SBT, and some things about Oswald and Ruby. College students at the time figured anyone who wanted to appeal to them had the same views.

The Warren Report and the war combined to produce on the part of college students great distrust in government and in the Establishment. The saying that went, you can't trust anyone over age 30, reflected how college (and high school) students tended only to trust members of their cohort. At least on matters of politics; and the JFK assassination was viewed by students in that era through a political lens.

As for infiltration of and recruitment within protest groups, it certainly occurred. I can't speak about FBI activities, but I know army's military intelligence had an interest in such groups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark - there was a public counterculture, some of whom were clearly plants. I would suggest you ponder the life of Eldridge Cleaver for one. Don makes clear distinctions between media portrayal of counterculture, and the actual counterculture. Krassner was the latter, so was Brussell. Mainstream media paid them no attention, nor did most American citizens. Admittedly Krassner was better known.

It is very telling that Watergate broke the way it did, and there is clear evidence that Bob Woodward is a CIA asset.

I dont think Don ever suggested that every rock star or known counterculture figure was an intelligence asset. I think maybe you are setting up some straw dog arguments. To be clear, I agree with much of what you say and appreciate your strong point of view. I am not sure you are some doctrinaire leftists. I usually recognize those. But I think you may have skimmed the surface on some issues that deserve a much deeper look, such as CIA influence in counterculture history. Have you looked at Altamount carefully for instance? Clearly something was afoot there. The bad LSD being passed around was deliberate. Take a look at the two books I mentioned. You will find them thought provoking at least - Acid Dreams, and Weird Scenes From the Canyon.

I know this is off topic, so my apologies. The thread on Nixon is very interesting. I am inclined to think that for the most part presidents are not as powerful as we might think, and that they do answer to a largely invisible power structure that can both make them and break them. The quote that Mr. Caddy posted is hard to verify however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul Brancato,

Your post #84 leads me to make a prediction.

The individual who will be elected U.S. President in 2016 will serve the interests of very wealthy, powerful, mostly hidden individuals who control the U.S. (now world) financial system.

That eliminates Cruz, Rand, and Rubio. It plays to Hillary vs. Jeb. The financial masters don't care whichever of these shills win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nixon's bombing of Cambodia fed the Khmer Rouge insurgency and the slaughter of 2 million.

Nixon formed the Drug Enforcement Administration and put Lucien Conein in charge of smuggling smack under the color of authority.

In 1992 I wrote the text for "The World's Most Hated People" trading card set (as N. Kidd Sylene); I thought Nixon deserved the spot up front.

http://www.deathwishindustries.com/index.php?op=home/What%20Is%20Best/Murderer%20and%20Hated%20People%20Cards

The crimes of Clinton and Obama seem petty compared to Tricky D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mark Valenti

Mark - there was a public counterculture, some of whom were clearly plants. I would suggest you ponder the life of Eldridge Cleaver for one. Don makes clear distinctions between media portrayal of counterculture, and the actual counterculture. Krassner was the latter, so was Brussell. Mainstream media paid them no attention, nor did most American citizens. Admittedly Krassner was better known.

As I said in an earlier post, the only way most Americans knew the leaders of the counter culture was when they were beaten, arrested or in little clips of speeches on college campuses. Occasionally someone like Buckley would invite them on, ostensibly to debate a subject but really to set them up for embarrassment.

The counterculture was co-opted by advertisers and TV shows that wanted a 'groovy' vibe. Hoffman and Rubin and the rest were relegated to pick up whatever PR they could by using themselves as court jesters.

This was Don's original point: "Jerry Rubin later morphed nicely into a Wall Street investor, for example. Gloria Steinem and Timothy Leary were both later shown to be affiliated with the CIA. Malcolm X's bodyguard was an undercover FBI agent. So was Fred Hampton's. One of the four "KKK" members who fired the shots that killed Viola Liuzzo was an FBI informant. The list goes on. Why didn't any of those anti-war protesters bring up the JFK assassination? Why didn't they criticize the Warren Report?"

My rebuttal: don't simply insinuate that these "leaders" were corrupt. Prove it. How was Timothy Leary manipulated into his role? What effect did that manipulation have on his message? Show me where Gloria Steinum's decades of effort on behalf of women was unduly influenced by the CIA.

Or is it all just paranoid rambling? I mean c'mon.

Who would you have wanted to suddenly start criticizing the Warren Report beyond Mark Lane, an attorney fully in command of the pertinent details? Who else would you want to speak up besides Bertrand Russell, a highly respected and globally lionized philosopher? What more could you ask for besides Josiah Thompson, a Yalie for Chrissakes, a freakin' Navy Vet with a Ph.D.

There were questioning articles in Esquire, Playboy, TIme, Newsweek, US News, the NY Times. Of course Mockingbird was in full swing, and there were plenty of plants amongst the reporters. But to act like NOBODY SAID ANYTHING from the left, it's ridiculous.

I dont think Don ever suggested that every rock star or known counterculture figure was an intelligence asset. I think maybe you are setting up some straw dog arguments.

Actually I'm trying to ask Don to be more clear regarding his accusatory statement.

To be clear, I agree with much of what you say and appreciate your strong point of view. I am not sure you are some doctrinaire leftists. I usually recognize those. But I think you may have skimmed the surface on some issues that deserve a much deeper look, such as CIA influence in counterculture history.

I will happily match my scholarship to yours or anyone's. I have a strong point of view, having seen these events unfurl as a young person. Everyone knows about Cointelpro, it was in all the papers.

Have you looked at Altamount carefully for instance? Clearly something was afoot there. The bad LSD being passed around was deliberate.

Are you suggesting Sam Cutler was a CIA plant?

Take a look at the two books I mentioned. You will find them thought provoking at least - Acid Dreams, and Weird Scenes From the Canyon.

I lived in Laurel Canyon for a year. I'm pretty well-versed in the culture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take a look at the two books I mentioned. You will find them thought provoking at least - Acid Dreams, and Weird Scenes From the Canyon.

I lived in Laurel Canyon for a year. I'm pretty well-versed in the culture.

David McGowan, the author of Weird Scenes, mis-identifies ground zero of the psychedelic movement.

It wasn't Laurel Canyon.

'65-'66 in San Francisco.

Anybody claim that Ken Kesey, Bill Graham, or the Jefferson Airplane were CIA?

No.

Laurel Canyon had a much bigger impact on the music later in the decade -- the singer/songwriter and country-rock trends.

For intel purposes LSD was too unpredictable. Other than releasing large quantities of it thru academic sources, CIA influence on the counter-culture has been over-stated, imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mark Valenti

There was overlap, obviously. Kids in the 60's/70's were pretty voracious for interesting experiences, I'm sure the demand took whomever by surprise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul,

Yes, I'm a huge fan of Dave McGowan, who wrote Weird Scenes Inside the Canyon. Much of the book, along with a lot of other extremely controversial "extremist" stuff, can be found on his web site http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/ I'm sure many here will think him way too "far out" for public consumption.

I believe you have read my book (and I thank you for that). For others who may be interested, my thoughts on these subjects are detailed there far more clearly than I can do on a forum. http://www.amazon.com/Hidden-History-Conspiracies-Cover-Ups-American/dp/1629144843

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...