DOES IT MATTER TODAY THAT JFK WAS KILLED?

[Martin Blank]

I ask that, Jon, because it makes a difference when a boy is exposed to a given science or art at a very young age. Young children learn faster and deeper than adults. For example, very young children can learn four or five different languages with ease, while adults struggle to learn just one foreign language.

Also, the greatest musicians were always the ones who were exposed to music from very young ages, like Mozart, for example, or whose parents were musicians, like John Lennon or Brian Wilson.

So, the fact that Edwin Walker went to Military School before he went to West Point is likely to have stimulated his imagination and entered his personality, far more so than somebody who studied military science as an adult. I think that stands to reason, with psychological statistics.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

oh so girls don't count. "likely?" you know this for a fact?

[Martin Blank]

Let's take "most." Most here (all musicians) means more than half; let's call most 50.1%.

Accordingly, 99% of most = 0.99 x 0.501. Which is .496, or 49.6%.

So, the fact that 99% of most musicians aren't geniuses means, at the very least, 49.6% of all musicians aren't geniuses. Which means, at the very most, 50.4% of all musicians are geniuses.

It's rather profound.

i think it's 99.9 % of each individual who is counted in the majority. you know like a pound of flesh from each of these people adjusted for their height and weight

[Martin Blank]

another one bites the dust:

from the undefeated champion of the forum in the super hevyweight class. you know hims as paul trejo: Ruth and Michael Paine knew NOTHING then, and still today know NOTHING about the plot to kill JFK -- nor anything at all about the Cover-up.

Another suspicious event involving the Paines occurred on the day of the assassination. At 1:00 pm on November 22. 1963, Michael Paine placed a collect call to his wife to discuss Oswald's involvement in the assassination. While the telephone operator remained on the line, Michael Paine told his wife that he “Felt sure Lee Harvey Oswald had killed the President but was not responsible.” Rather ominously he added, “We both know who is responsible.” (FBI report of Robert C. Lish, November 26, 1963, JFK Document No. 105-82555-1437) The most extraordinary thing about this call is that it took place one hour before Oswald's arrest. For obvious reasons, the Warren Commission wanted to sweep this little problem under the rug as swiftly as possible. During Michael Paine's testimony, the ever resourceful commission attorney Wesley Liebeler changed the date of the call to the following day:

LIEBELER: Did you talk to your wife on the telephone at any time during Saturday, November 23?

PAINE: I was in the police station again, and I think I called her from there.

LIEBELER: Did you make any remark to the effect that you knew who was responsible?

PAINE: And I don't know who the assassin is or was; no. So I did not. (2H428)

As researcher John Armstrong pointed out, “Liebeler had phone company records and an FBI report in hand which showed the collect call was placed on November 22 and not on November 23. By intentionally asking Michael Paine about a non-existent telephone call Liebeler was obstructing justice and colluding with a witness to falsify testimony.”

all hail the new champion!!!!!!!

[Paul Trejo]

BUMPED

Edited February 24, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Jon G. Tidd]

Martin,

I believe each individual counts as much as the next, except as to cattle-class airplane seating.

So, a 400-pound musician counts as much as a 105-pound musician. In the law that is,

Perhaps the 400-pound musician is a far better cellist than the 105-pound musician. Or vice versa.

On this forum, I believe, we don't take gender or size into account, unless necessary.

Although I suspect Kathleen Collins is taking size into account in another diary thread.

Edited February 23, 2016 by Jon G. Tidd

[Paul Trejo]

Jon, please tell me your opinion about General Walker's significant reputation among the Right Wing in Dallas -- including the City authorities.

Everybody knows that UN Secretary Adlai Stevenson was humiliated and personally attacked in Dallas in October 1963. Did you know that General Walker and his people were behind that attack? Here are only two of many sources:

http://www.pet880.com/images/19631024_Dallas_Morning_News.pdf

http://www.pet880.com/images/19631025_Dallas_Morning_News.pdf

Chris Cravens documented this history in detail in his 1992 dissertation on Edwin Walker and the Right Wing in Dallas. Walker was protected by City authorities in Dallas. He could get away with nearly anything.

For example, after the deadly Ole Miss riots of 1962, when Walker returned to Dallas in early October there at Love Field, he was greeted with a warm reception from those waving Confederate Flags and signs saying, "Walker for President, 1964". Here's that photo:

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/jfk50/explore/20130511-before-gunning-for-jfk-oswald-targeted-ex-gen.-edwin-a.-walker--and-missed.ece

IMHO, there is a direct linkage between (1) the Ole Miss riots of 1962; (2) the attack on Adlai Stevenson in 1963; and (3) the JFK assassination. All three events show the same skillful coordination of motivated Right-wing volunteers.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited February 24, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Jon G. Tidd]

Paul,

I know little about Walker. I defer to your factual knowledge of him.

I do know something about army life, doctrine, and training.

When Walker was serving, the U.S. Army had three combat branches: armor, artillery, and infantry. I understand that Walker was an artillery-branch officer before he became a general officer. General officers as such belong to no branch. It's fair to say most general officers have a combat-arms background. It's also fair to that when Walker was serving, West Point graduates dominated the ranks of general officers.

I know something about West Point education. The basic education always has been in engineering. Physical training has been a big part of the education, as has been military history. West Point never has trained its cadets in political assassination. Period. Neither has the Army War College, which trains mid-level army officers.

To a large extent, army officers receive on-the-job training. Guaranteed there never has been OJT for political assassinations.

Finally, Paul, when Walker took the oath as a second lieutenant, he swore to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution. No army officer worth his or her weight has ever taken that oath lightly.

That oath, binding for life, would not have barred Walker from protesting at Ole Miss. It would have barred him from harming JFK.

[Paul Trejo]

Paul,

I know little about Walker. I defer to your factual knowledge of him.

I do know something about army life, doctrine, and training.

When Walker was serving, the U.S. Army had three combat branches: armor, artillery, and infantry. I understand that Walker was an artillery-branch officer before he became a general officer. General officers as such belong to no branch. It's fair to say most general officers have a combat-arms background. It's also fair to that when Walker was serving, West Point graduates dominated the ranks of general officers.

I know something about West Point education. The basic education always has been in engineering. Physical training has been a big part of the education, as has been military history. West Point never has trained its cadets in political assassination. Period. Neither has the Army War College, which trains mid-level army officers.

To a large extent, army officers receive on-the-job training. Guaranteed there never has been OJT for political assassinations.

Finally, Paul, when Walker took the oath as a second lieutenant, he swore to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution. No army officer worth his or her weight has ever taken that oath lightly.

That oath, binding for life, would not have barred Walker from protesting at Ole Miss. It would have barred him from harming JFK.

All good points, Jon, but you left out a few vital facts about Edwin Walkers' special case:

(1) Although West Point never teaches assassination, this is no proof that motivated students would never research such a thing on their own.

(2) After Edwin Walker graduated from West Point, he quickly joined a "Special Forces" unit. I wonder if "Special Forces" in 1931 meant anything like "Special Forces" meant in 1971. If so, then pinpoint covert activities would not be out of the question.

(2.1) While I agree there has never been on-the-job training for political assassinations, ultimately it is a variety of covert operations, is it not? And these skills are taught somewhere, officially, are they not? Perhaps in "Special Forces?"

(3) General Walker, after 30 years of outstanding military service in two wars, resigned from the US Army in November 1961 -- he did not retire as he easily could have -- but he deliberately resigned, and deliberately forfeited his 30-year Army Pension.

(3.1) This made Edwin Walker the only US General to resign in the 20th century, forfeiting his Army Pension.

(3.2) When asked why he did this, Walker said, "It will be my purpose now, as a civilian, to attempt to do what I have found it no longer possible to do in uniform.”

(3.3) IMHO, this doesn't explain well enough the rash acting of forfeiting a lifetime service pension -- but that's what Walker did.

(3.4) There was something about the Uniform and the Army itself that had turned sour for Edwin Walker.

(3.5) What do you say now, Jon, as regards taking this oath seriously? Is it not really a case that Walker took his oath VERY seriously, so seriously that he would not violate his oath by keeping his Uniform and belonging to the John Birch Society?

(4.0) As a matter of fact, Edwin Walker submitted his resignation once before, under President Eisenhower in 1959. What happened in 1959? Two things:

(4.1) Walker read the Black Book (1959) by Robert Welch, which convinced its readers that President Eisenhower was in fact a Communist.

(4.2) This meant that the entire power structure of Washington DC was under the control of the Communists, including the Pentagon. So, to avoid this contagion, Edwin Walker resigned from the US Army.

(5.0) Ike denied the 1959 request. Instead, Ike promoted Walker to his new post in Germany

(5.1) While in Germany, Walker made lots of enemies, especially with the US Army's Overseas Weekly newspaper there.

(5.2) By 1961, the Overseas Weekly newspaper made Walker into headline news as a card-carrying member of the John Birch Society. This started a shore flap, and the JCS decided to remove Walker from his command.

(5.3) Long story short, Walker resigned in November 1961, and though JFK offered to keep Walker on in Hawaii, Walker submitted his resignation for the 2nd time, and JFK accepted it.

(5.5) So -- although Walker took his oath in 1931 when he joined the Army, he resigned from the Army, because of his newfound political beliefs that FDR, Truman, Eisenhower and JFK had all been Communists.

(5.6) Walker joined the Radical Right political cause in the USA -- all without his Army Pension. He got plenty of money, though, from H.L. Hunt and other wealthy backers, as Walker embarked on a political career, in which he would first run for Texas Governor.

(6.0) IMHO, the people who killed JFK didn't do it for money -- they did it because they TRULY in their heart of hearts, believed that JFK was a Communist, and therefore a Traitor, and therefore had to die for the good of the US Constitution.

Please read the October 1963 newspaper articles I posted above. They confirm the basics of what I'm saying here.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited February 25, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[James DiEugenio]

Does it matter today that JFK was killed?

Immensely. Why do you think the media did what it did at the fiftieth?

But more directly, the plotters got what they wanted out of his death:

1. A policy reversal in Vietnam, and the expansion of the war way beyond what JFK ever dreamed it would be.

2. A freeze out in Cuba as to a relaxation of tensions, which would not be renewed for fifty years.

3. A reversal of policy in Indonesia towards Sukarno, which would result in the absolutely horrifying CIA coup there in 1965 which brought Suharto to power.

4. A reversal of policy in Congo, which would end the legacy of Lumumba and bring to power Mobutu, another Suharto.

5. A reversal of policy in the Middle East, which would now result in a turning away from Nasser and Egypt, and a friendly tilt toward Saudi Arabia, and Iran and an almost loony favoring of Israel vs the Palestinians.

6. A rapid acceleration of favoritism toward the big banks/ Federal Reserve system vs the smaller bank and easier credit policies of James Saxon.

7. The spurning of the democratically elected Juan Bosch in Dominican Republic, in favor of preserving the military junta that replaced him

Etc etc etc. If you add up all the lives that were lost in these reversals you are well into the millions. The money is in the trillions--yes trillions-- especially in Congo and Indonesia. JFK wanted that money to go to the native peoples there. At the time of his death, he was actually arranging for Sukarno to nationalize certain businesses by giving their owners a fair deal on their value.

The myth about JFK was that he was a moderate liberal.

Not true. Kennedy was the most radical president in the last seventy years--and no one else comes close.. And as with Roosevelt, the Power Elite--as David Talbot so nicely put it--decided they had enough of him.

Edited February 25, 2016 by James DiEugenio

[Paul Trejo]

On the contrary, James, the JFK Plotters failed to get what they wanted most -- the invasion of Cuba and a replacement for Fidel Castro.

The reason that LHO was sheep-dipped for SIX SOLID MONTHS in New Orleans to look like a good friend of Fidel Castro, was so that the JFK Plotters could pin the JFK murder on Fidel Castro, the FPCC and the Communists, and so justify the invasion of Cuba.

J. Edgar Hoover, LBJ, Allen Dulles and Earl Warren figured out their nefarious scheme before 11/22/1963 was over. Hoover led the way, because Hoover had a stack of files on 544 Camp Street, and Hoover knew exactly what LHO was doing there with Guy Banister.

By 3pm on 11/22/1963, FBI records tell us that Hoover called RFK to tell RFK the opposite of the news coming out of Dallas. Dallas was reporting continually that LHO was a Communist and an FPCC Secretary. Hoover told RFK calmly and bluntly that LHO was not a Communist and was not an officer of the FPCC.

The game was up at that point. The JFK plotters failed to get what they wanted -- and they went home with their tails between their legs.

US Politics as usual won out in Washington DC (for better or worse) thanks to J. Edgar Hoover.

Does the JFK murder matter? Yes, because Hoover, LBJ, Dulles and Warren decided to not prosecute Walker and his henchmen, because this would have given the USSR an enormous propaganda victory right in the middle of the Cold War.

So, the mythology of LHO as the "Lone Nut" was forged by the entire FBI marching in step. Even Bethesda was forced to conform to this Cover-up.

I repeat -- the JFK Kill Team was completely separate and even opposed to the JFK Cover-up Team. That's what 50 years of CIA-did-it CTers have missed.

As a result, we have had an unpunished Radical Right running amok in the USA since 1963. Thank goodness for President GHW Bush, who signed the JFK Records Act of 1992, promising to release all US Government Top Secret documents on the JFK murder on Thursday 26 October 2017.

On that day, I predict, we will witness a comeuppance in the USA second only to the surrender of Robert E. Lee.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited February 25, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[James DiEugenio]

We can skip over that flapdoodle of course.

Another point that does not get accented enough is Kennedy's economic policies. I only touched on them above, and I would be wiling to wager that few people here have ever heard of James Saxon. Saxon gave an interview to US News and World Report in November of 1963--I think. It was quite interesting.

He talked about how he was trying to get banks to loosen credit standards for small businesses and consumers so more spending would take place. He also wanted states to charter more state banks so that control of those funds would be more local and less in New York City. A very interesting interview which someone sent me through BOR once. I hope some one can find it.

There was also his demand oriented tax cuts, which were mostly aimed toward the middle class and working class.

Further, as Donald Gibson has so magisterially elucidated in his fine book, Battling Wall Street, Kennedy had a very intricately worked out and beautifully modulated tax and finance program that he wanted to use to get businesses to reinvest in their holdings in America so they could expand employment. He was going to use a series of tax credits to reward investments in research and technology and also in plant expansion. And he was going to penalize companies for taking their business abroad!!

See, if you combine his policies against imperialism in the Third World, as noted above in post 85, with what I just wrote above, you will see that Kennedy was very much opposed toward the globalist system of economic hegemony that the Power Elite was formulating at the time. It was planned through centers of power like the CFR and instrumented through their ambassadors like McCloy and Dulles. (That idiot Caufield actually has Kennedy in the CFR. He never even read Imperial Brain Trust, the best book ever written on the subject. He was not.) See, that globalist agenda was not fulfilled until Bill Clinton became president--who I am convinced now was a wolf in sheep's clothing. Which shows you what happened to the Democratic Party after Kennedy's murder. I mean Kennedy was not even in the CFR, Clinton was at a Bilderberger Group meeting.

See, a very good example of this is Brazil. In the fall of 1963, David Rockefeller wanted to meet with Kennedy about that country. JFK knew what he wanted him to do. So he rejected the meeting. A couple of weeks after his death, LBJ did take that meeting. And then a few weeks after, the coup was planned. The point man for the first part of the coup: John McCloy, as he is sitting on the Warren Commission.

Edited February 25, 2016 by James DiEugenio

[James DiEugenio]

One last point, Kennedy's economic policies, as formulated through he and Walter Heller--who despised Milton Friedman--really worked. By 1963, the economy was humming along.

But once LBJ got in there and reversed Kennedy's Vietnam policy, he had a huge problem. He knew that America would not pay for that war, at least not completely. So he started printing money. As the war expanded, he printed even more.

This caused the terrible curse of stagflation, that is money losing value as the same time productivity is going down. It drove Nixon nuts and he made it even worse, with his price controls and his Israel policy which caused OPEC to jack up oil prices. It then had a large role in ruining Carter since Volcker decided to wring the inflation out of the economy with high interest rates.

Then Reagan and Bush came in, followed by Clinton, and globalization has now run rampant. To the point that its the opposite of what Kennedy wanted. Businesses get rewarded for going abroad and the middle class in America has been pretty much gutted. So, like his foreign policy, his economic policy was also turned around.

Yep, so I think Kennedy's murder matters today. Its a terrible country. I mean Trump is probably going to be our next president.

If my girlfriend had a passport, I would seriously think of moving to Costa Rica or the south of France.

Edited February 25, 2016 by James DiEugenio

[Martin Blank]

Does it matter today that JFK was killed?

Immensely. Why do you think the media did what it did at the fiftieth?

But more directly, the plotters got what they wanted out of his death:

1. A policy reversal in Vietnam, and the expansion of the war way beyond what JFK ever dreamed it would be.

2. A freeze out in Cuba as to a relaxation of tensions, which would not be renewed for fifty years.

3. A reversal of policy in Indonesia towards Sukarno, which would would result in the absolutely horrifying CIA coup there in 1965 which brought Suharto to power.

4. A reversal of policy in Congo, which would end the legacy of Lumumba and bring to power Mobutu, another Suharto.

5. A reversal of policy in the Middle East, which would now result in a turning away from Nasser and Egypt, and a friendly tilt toward Saudi Arabia, and Iran and an almost loony favoring of Israel vs the Palestinians.

6. A rapid acceleration of favoritism toward the big banks/ Federal Reserve system vs the smaller bank and easier credit policies of James Saxon.

7. The spurning of the democratically elected Juan Bosch in Dominican Republic, in favor of preserving the military junta that replaced him

Etc etc etc. If you add up all the lives that were lost in these reversals you are well into the millions. The money is in the trillions--yes trillions-- especially in Congo and Indonesia. JFK wanted that money to got to the native peoples there. At the time of his death, he was actually arranging for Sukarno to nationalize certain businesses by giving their owners a fair deal on their value.

The myth about JFK was that he was a moderate liberal.

Not true. Kennedy was the most radical president in the last seventy years--and no one else comes close.. And as with Roosevelt, the Power Elite--as David Talbot so nicely put it--decided they had enough of him.

he was quite simply our last real president and maybe one of the few in our history

[Martin Blank]

On the contrary, James, the JFK Plotters failed to get what they wanted most -- the invasion of Cuba and a replacement for Fidel Castro.

The reason that LHO was sheep-dipped for SIX SOLID MONTHS in New Orleans to look like a good friend of Fidel Castro, was so that the JFK Plotters could pin the JFK murder on Fidel Castro, the FPCC and the Communists, and so justify the invasion of Cuba.

J. Edgar Hoover, LBJ, Allen Dulles and Earl Warren figured out their nefarious scheme before 11/22/1963 was over. Hoover led the way, because Hoover had a stack of files on 544 Camp Street, and Hoover knew exactly what LHO was doing there with Guy Banister.

By 3pm on 11/22/1963, FBI records tell us that Hoover called RFK to tell RFK the opposite of the news coming out of Dallas. Dallas was reporting continually that LHO was a Communist and an FPCC Secretary. Hoover told RFK calmly and bluntly that LHO was not a Communist and was not an officer of the FPCC.

The game was up at that point. The JFK plotters failed to get what they wanted -- and they went home with their tails between their legs.

US Politics as usual won out in Washington DC (for better or worse) thanks to J. Edgar Hoover.

Does the JFK murder matter? Yes, because Hoover, LBJ, Dulles and Warren decided to not prosecute Walker and his henchmen, because this would have given the USSR an enormous propaganda victory right in the middle of the Cold War.

So, the mythology of LHO as the "Lone Nut" was forged by the entire FBI marching in step. Even Bethesda was forced to conform to this Cover-up.

I repeat -- the JFK Kill Team was completely separate and even opposed to the JFK Cover-up Team. That's what 50 years of CIA-did-it CTers have missed.

As a result, we have had an unpunished Radical Right running amok in the USA since 1963. Thank goodness for President GHW Bush, who signed the JFK Records Act of 1992, promising to release all US Government Top Secret documents on the JFK murder on Thursday 26 October 2017.

On that day, I predict, we will witness a comeuppance in the USA second only to the surrender of Robert E. Lee.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

lee was a traitor who should have been executed for treason

[James DiEugenio]

Nice one Martin.