The inevitable end result of our last 56 years

[W. Niederhut]

9 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Add on (sorry):

Greenwald's larger point is also worth considering:

Whatever people believe about 9/11 or 1/6, the national security state, and allied political parties and media, developed a subsequent narrative to expand the police powers of the state. 

Believe me, Trump will pass from the scene. But Trump is about 1% the threat to your personal liberties, or the democratic processes, than the national security state. 

If you are a reader of this forum, most likely you believe the national security state rearranged who was in the White House in Nov. 22. I think that is close to a probability.

If the "Deep State" was willing to do that in 1963, and today has vasty expanded budget and technology...and a much more compliant media....really, pursuing Trump seems like barking up a bonsai tree in redwood forest.

 

Ben,

     You haven't studied, or understood, the serious research literature about 9/11, and your repeated attempts to link Trump's January 6th coup attempt to Deep State ops like the JFK assassination and 9/11 is misleading and unfortunate. In effect, it gives serious, accurate research about Deep State conspiracy theories a bad name.

     Nothing that I say will deter you from continuing to post this kind of erroneous blather, but I wish you would hang it up in 2022.  One year of reading your repetitious, inaccurate posts about the alleged January 6th Deep State-sponsored "scrum" was enough.  Time to face the facts.

     The questions that Greg Doudna asked you, above, are the same questions that I have asked you, repeatedly, in our 2021 discussions about January 6th.  Cui bono?  Who could have conceivably benefited from the January 6th attack on Congress other than Donald Trump?

     And your answers make no sense.  Your vaguely described Deep State conspiracy theory about January 6th is debunked by the overwhelming evidence that Trump and his Willard Hotel cronies organized and incited the attack on Congress in an attempt to block the certification of Biden's election.  Period.  

       I have raised questions about intelligence failures and Trump's possible role in blocking appropriate protection of the Capitol for the past year.  So much for Deep State "complicity."  If the FBI, Pentagon, and NSA were in any sense "complicit" in January 6th, it was, evidently, with the objective of facilitating Trump's coup attempt.  Trump's January 6th attack on Congress was aided and abetted by some of his flying monkeys in D.C., including Chris Miller and, possibly, Christopher Wray.  The fact that it was poorly conceived doesn't detract from Trump's guilt.

     But I notice that you are not alone in your ongoing attempts to deflect blame for January 6th away from Trump and his cronies-- Eastman, Bannon, Giuliani, Kerik, Navarro, Brooks, Gosar, Cruz, Hawley, Jordan, Boebert, et.al.  Fox News is also, apparently, still pushing your alternate reality narrative about January 6th.

     Do you still get your "news" from Fox?

Fox News goes through the looking-glass on US Capitol attack anniversary

Right wing network presented a carnival of conspiracy theories casting blame anywhere other than on Trump and his supporters

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/jan/07/fox-news-6-january-capitol-attack-tucker-carlson-sean-hannity-laura-ingraham

January 7, 2022

[Ron Bulman]

 

[Guest]

4 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Cui bono?  Who could have conceivably benefited from the January 6th attack on Congress other than Donald Trump?

That's basically like saying; who else could have benefitted from JFK's death, other than the communists?! 

[W. Niederhut]

22 minutes ago, Chris Barnard said:

That's basically like saying; who else could have benefitted from JFK's death, other than the communists?! 

Chris,

     "Cui bono" is a standard inquiry about the motives for any crime.

     It's as relevant a question in the case of the JFK assassination as it is in the case of the January 6th mob attack on the U.S. Congress.

     In the case of the JFK assassination, the "communists" were among the least likely to benefit, given JFK's efforts to de-escalate the Cold War and, possibly, establish diplomatic relations with Cuba.  In fact, both Castro and Khrushchev were aggrieved by the news of JFK's murder. 

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Chris,

     "Cui bono" is a standard inquiry about the motives for any crime.

     It's as relevant a question in the case of the JFK assassination as it is in the case of the January 6th mob attack on the U.S. Congress.

     In the case of the JFK assassination, the "communists" were among the least likely to benefit, given JFK's efforts to de-escalate the Cold War and, possibly, establish diplomatic relations with Cuba.  In fact, both Castro and Khrushchev were aggrieved by the news of JFK's murder. 

William, I think that went over your head, maybe I was unclear. 
- Cui bono: you've seen me use the phrase many times to make points, I am sure. 
- We know from the research here, and the many books available that explain the possible likely motives for the JFKA, that communism isn't the reason. However, at the time the USA was experiencing a communist paranoia and a very real threat. For those not scratching the surface, communists may have seemed the culprit. Even today a communist sympathiser/defector is still blamed for JFK's murder in prominent media channels and history books.
So, given the above, and drawing a parallel to 1/6, what makes you think you aren't one of the US citizens who is seeing it in a similar misguided fashion to the way some Americans saw the JFKA as communist related? ie incorrectly. 

How is it that you can't see anyone else gaining? Surely you must be able to find some angles, or alternatives? 

[Paul Brancato]

Ben and Chris - in your views did the Democrats steal the election? 

[W. Niederhut]

49 minutes ago, Chris Barnard said:

William, I think that went over your head, maybe I was unclear. 
- Cui bono: you've seen me use the phrase many times to make points, I am sure. 
- We know from the research here, and the many books available that explain the possible likely motives for the JFKA, that communism isn't the reason. However, at the time the USA was experiencing a communist paranoia and a very real threat. For those not scratching the surface, communists may have seemed the culprit. Even today a communist sympathiser/defector is still blamed for JFK's murder in prominent media channels and history books.
So, given the above, and drawing a parallel to 1/6, what makes you think you aren't one of the US citizens who is seeing it in a similar misguided fashion to the way some Americans saw the JFKA as communist related? ie incorrectly. 

How is it that you can't see anyone else gaining? Surely you must be able to find some angles, or alternatives? 

Chris,

   You're begging the question I've asked Ben, rather than answering it.

    If you have any ideas about who besides Trump potentially benefited from the January 6th mob attack on Congress, by all means let us know.

Edited January 8, 2022 by W. Niederhut

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Paul Brancato said:

Ben and Chris - in your views did the Democrats steal the election? 

It’s impossible to say. In every election votes are stolen, whether 2020 or 1960. I don’t think that’s in question at all. The question is; to what extent? I think it’s absurd to view the process as holy or clean, or one side as virtuous and the other demonic. It’s an exceedingly dirty business, with ruthless players. What hope do we have of truth? 
Just to bring things to Britain, Tony Blair got the highest award possible from the Queen’s honours this year, Mr WMD’s. He got a knighthood. The message is; we have a culture of rewarding the deceitful and corrupt. You do too, look at the money presidents make after leaving office. 

As an outsider, looking in, does it even matter? In 2016 you had almost every Dem playing the role of the sore losers and rejecting the legitimacy of Trump. In 2020 you have almost every Rep rejecting the legitimacy of Biden and playing the role of sore losers. The culture propagated is awful, toxic. The media perpetuates the hate and division. 

Huxley said something about the future in 1958, that what would be optimal is if each election, there were just a choice of two candidates with minimal policy differences. That is way you’d ensure continuity for the ruling class. Of course the media would make out the two were polar opposites, whipping up emotions and passions. We see that every 4 years. 

Whether you have Biden or Trump, you’ll still be getting exploited and fleeced if you are in the middle class or poor. We’d still be accelerating toward technocracy and authoritarianism. That’s the present trajectory. 

The disturbing thing to me, from the outside is; neither set of supporters can see their own parties for what they really are, they can only cling to a hope that the next candidate sold to the public like soap flakes, is going to be the one that turns things around, banishing the corruption. That’s all very sad. You should demand better than two sub standard candidates each election and having to pick the lesser of two evils. The system is rotten to the core.
 

PS I get that Biden seems more dignified, has more class than Trump. But, they equate to the same thing for your people. Unless of course you just want someone who seems dignified in office. A lesson might be; the left and the right can take you to terrible places. Beware a wolf in sheep's clothing. 

[Guest]

21 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Chris,

   You're begging the question I've asked Ben, rather than answering it.

    If you have any ideas about who besides Trump potentially benefited from the January 6th mob attack on Congress, by all means let us know.

Of course I have ideas, very clear ones. I just can’t understand whether you are being obtuse, or you genuinely can’t see anyone else who could benefit? Which is it? 

[Benjamin Cole]

6 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Ben,

     You haven't studied, or understood, the serious research literature about 9/11, and your repeated attempts to link Trump's January 6th coup attempt to Deep State ops like the JFK assassination and 9/11 is misleading and unfortunate. In effect, it gives serious, accurate research about Deep State conspiracy theories a bad name.

     Nothing that I say will deter you from continuing to post this kind of erroneous blather, but I wish you would hang it up in 2022.  One year of reading your repetitious, inaccurate posts about the alleged January 6th Deep State-sponsored "scrum" was enough.  Time to face the facts.

     The questions that Greg Doudna asked you, above, are the same questions that I have asked you, repeatedly, in our 2021 discussions about January 6th.  Cui bono?  Who could have conceivably benefited from the January 6th attack on Congress other than Donald Trump?

     And your answers make no sense.  Your vaguely described Deep State conspiracy theory about January 6th is debunked by the overwhelming evidence that Trump and his Willard Hotel cronies organized and incited the attack on Congress in an attempt to block the certification of Biden's election.  Period.  

       I have raised questions about intelligence failures and Trump's possible role in blocking appropriate protection of the Capitol for the past year.  So much for Deep State "complicity."  If the FBI, Pentagon, and NSA were in any sense "complicit" in January 6th, it was, evidently, with the objective of facilitating Trump's coup attempt.  Trump's January 6th attack on Congress was aided and abetted by some of his flying monkeys in D.C., including Chris Miller and, possibly, Christopher Wray.  The fact that it was poorly conceived doesn't detract from Trump's guilt.

     But I notice that you are not alone in your ongoing attempts to deflect blame for January 6th away from Trump and his cronies-- Eastman, Bannon, Giuliani, Kerik, Navarro, Brooks, Gosar, Cruz, Hawley, Jordan, Boebert, et.al.  Fox News is also, apparently, still pushing your alternate reality narrative about January 6th.

     Do you still get your "news" from Fox?

Fox News goes through the looking-glass on US Capitol attack anniversary

Right wing network presented a carnival of conspiracy theories casting blame anywhere other than on Trump and his supporters

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/jan/07/fox-news-6-january-capitol-attack-tucker-carlson-sean-hannity-laura-ingraham

January 7, 2022

W.--

I disagree with your assessments, and I think pre-event, it is far more likely there was national security state involvement in 1/6 than 9/11. 

However, I look forward to your continued involvement and participation n this forum, and I will read your copy for insights. 

I would like to say I wish members of this forum would extend equal graciousness to viewpoints consistent with, or opposed, to their own, or like mine, just on a different track (I being neither red or blue, D-R etc.).

Consider my request for graciousness. If one of us has a monopoly on the truth....then they should be most gracious of all. 

[Benjamin Cole]

22 hours ago, Matt Allison said:

Ben- I'm not sure how seriously we can take you when you're obviously deliberately limiting what information you avail yourself to.

Watch the movie I linked to and discuss that. As for the other stuff you're posting? No one here in America buys any of the pro-fascist/Trump talking points... except for, of course, the fascist Trumpers.

Matt-

Thank you for your comments and the documentary you linked to. 

I found it unpersuasive.  

In contrast, I do not think Glenn Greenwald's extensive and worthy track record warrants him being labelled as a "fascist/Trumper" nor does that label apply to me.

Remember too, there are left-wing and right-wing fascists. The two major political parties today seem to share this inclination....

I think this forum should graciously receive posters from across the political spectrum. 

For me, the topics of this forum are the JFKA, and the current-day manifestations of the national security sate and attendant media coverage (the same forces that likely erased JFK). 

I take a different view from you on what happened on 1/6. I am skeptical (with copious justification) of M$M narratives regarding 1/6. 

Surely, you can tolerate, and even try to appreciate, someone with a different take on curious events than yourself. 

 

[Benjamin Cole]

2 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Chris,

     "Cui bono" is a standard inquiry about the motives for any crime.

     It's as relevant a question in the case of the JFK assassination as it is in the case of the January 6th mob attack on the U.S. Congress.

     In the case of the JFK assassination, the "communists" were among the least likely to benefit, given JFK's efforts to de-escalate the Cold War and, possibly, establish diplomatic relations with Cuba.  In fact, both Castro and Khrushchev were aggrieved by the news of JFK's murder. 

W.--

 

I have said many times the biggest beneficiaries of the 1/6 scrum were the Donks and the allied national security state.  That's who benefitted. 

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, Paul Brancato said:

Ben and Chris - in your views did the Democrats steal the election? 

Paul--

Thank you for your inquiry. 

My view is that the presidential election should be by direct popular vote, and Biden won that by millions of votes. For that matter Hillary won it also. 

Unfortunately, we have this quadrennial disaster called the Electoral College, which favors manipulation on a state level, when a state is close.

The Rolling Stone, then a reputable publication, printed a long, long story by Robert Kennedy in 2004 that Bush jr. forces had stolen the election by rigging the absentee ballots in Ohio. Of course, we all know the Florida story. 

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/bill-clinton-rolling-stone-election-investigation-compelling-50956/

So, the 2020 election--could it have been fixed through manipulation of absentee ballots? Possibly--the US election machinery is so creaky and vulnerable to absentee ballot manipulation that I don't know. Voters do not have to show ID to vote, even by absentee ballot, unlike in Europe (where voter participation rates are much higher btw). 

I know I read the 2004 Rolling Stone RFK article back in the day, and I thought the election had been stolen. The 2020 election--seems unlikely, but then partisan sentiments have reached a fever pitch in America. People feel the ends justify the means. 

 

Bill Clinton: Rolling Stone Election Investigation “Compelling”

Asked his opinion about Robert Kennedy Jr.'s recent article in Rolling Stone, charging that John Kerry, not George Bush, won the majority of votes in Ohio and thus won the 2004 presidential election, Clinton said Kennedy made "a compelling case."

 

[Benjamin Cole]

7 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

Calling them "halfwits" is a weak downplaying of their actions and intent.

Like saying they were mentally challenged or disturbed?

Most were employed. Some firefighters, police, even military.

Brainwashed and inspired by Trump's obsessive rants of a stolen election and to march down to the Capital building and fight like hell?  Yes.

Trump's own words to his stop the steal crowd just before sending them on their whooping, yelling riled up way to the Capital bldg.

"Now it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy. And after this, we're going to walk down and I'll be there with you. We're going to walk down--

We're going to walk down. Anyone you want, but I think right here, we're going to walk down to the Capitol--

And we're going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women and we're probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them.

Because you'll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong."

 

Yesterday I heard a Jan 6th insurrection documentarian say the huge majority of the Capital march crowd were peaceful.

That only 700 of 5,000 broke through the barriers and went on a rampage through the Capital Bldg.

Did anyone ever catch on video or audio "anyone" in that larger Trump incited Capital building march crowd calling back the front line stormers? Calling for them to stop the rampage?

Or physically trying to stop or even slow them down once they saw the real bad physical violence beginning? The assaults on the Capital police? The smashing of doors and windows?

They had 3 hours time to do so.

I sure never saw anyone in the larger crowd doing anything or saying/yelling to their fellow storm troopers "STOP" or "THIS VIOLENCE IS WRONG."

What I saw was even the larger crowd yelling Trump slogans and wildly waving their Trump flags and posters both before and during the assault.

If the larger crowd was peaceful in intent, they sure didn't express this and their disagreement with the brutal actions of their fellow charging violent posse members.

And when interviewed during and after the violent attack, I have never seen on video any comments from the larger crowd members condemning the attack and violence. Most of those interviewed seemed okay with the violence and some even expressed it hadn't gone far enough!

That entire Capital building march crowd is culpable in the attack imo.

None of them made any effort verbally or physically to stop, slow down or call back their fellow attackers.

And I have yet to see anyone interviewed in that Trump worked up crowd after or during the attack express remorse over it's occurrence.

 

Hi Joe, and thanks for your comments. 

Trump actually told his audience to peacefully protest also. 

The scrum started while Trump was still blabbering away. And believe me, Trump blabbers. I don't know how anyone listens to that stuff. 

Much more important---what was the role of federal instigators and provocateurs on 1/6?

Should that topic be investigated...or preemptively dismissed? 

Do you think 1/6 could have been a state-manufactured event, such as the JFKA? 

 

PS--

I should apologize for calling the scrum who entered the Capitol as "halfwits." But hell's bells, many took selfies and videos of themselves in there, and sent triumphant texts, thus incriminating themselves. Many texts were semi-literate. Egads. 

Edited January 8, 2022 by Benjamin Cole
add on

[Ron Bulman]

12 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

W.--

 

I have said many times the biggest beneficiaries of the 1/6 scrum were the Donks and the allied national security state.  That's who benefitted. 

The chump is who benefitted.  He's still getting the attention he craves and maintains the power over not just his base but in turn the rest of the Republican party.