Jump to content
The Education Forum

Kamala Harris and the RFK assassination


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 277
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

20 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

I should add there was one other disappointing point about Obama.

One of his talking points was that he would have voted against the Iraq War, and he did make a good speech against the invasion at an anti war rally.

But yet today, I think we all know that the Iraq invasion was something that was manufactured, created, fabricated by certain people in the executive branch and then ramrodded through congress with all kinds of pressure.

The cost of that war to Iraq  cannot be calculated.  The invasion and the occupation were a disaster not just for the US and Iraq, but it helped expand terrorist groups in the  Middle East.

Should there not have been investigations of how and why this was done?  Should not people have been called to account for such a debacle? Not a whiff of this from Obama.  After all his wife is buds with W.

Both Gulf Wars were, the first one they had that girl sobbing in a hearing and talking about Iraqi soldiers taking babies from incubators and dropping them on the hard floor. It transpired that she was the daughter of a Kuwaiti diplomatic and that the whole testimony was a rehearsed fabrication. Bush Snr used it to drum up public support got the first Gulf war. The actual invasion in 2003, they'd more or less starved the country with sanctions before hand and implemented that oil for food program. At the time, I was totally bought into the WMD propaganda, how wrong we all were. There absolutely should have been people called out and an investigation but, the MO was straight out of the playbook which started with Mosadek. If you investigate one, you have to do the lot right? I wonder if Obama had benefactors, people who financially supported and mentored his rise?! 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chris, don't forget April Glaspie. And I agree about the awful effect of the sanctions.

 

I haven't read any of the extremist views about Obama.  Although I have heard about them.

But I think its pretty clear that he was a part of the club.

 Ray McGovern tells a good story about him.  Someone asked him, I think towards the beginning of his second term, "What happened to all the Hope and Change?" Obama replied,

"You saw what happened to Dr. King didn't you?"

At least the guy's honest.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

I should add there was one other disappointing point about Obama.

One of his talking points was that he would have voted against the Iraq War, and he did make a good speech against the invasion at an anti war rally.

But yet today, I think we all know that the Iraq invasion was something that was manufactured, created, fabricated by certain people in the executive branch and then ramrodded through congress with all kinds of pressure.

The cost of that war to Iraq  cannot be calculated.  The invasion and the occupation were a disaster not just for the US and Iraq, but it helped expand terrorist groups in the  Middle East.

Should there not have been investigations of how and why this was done?  Should not people have been called to account for such a debacle? Not a whiff of this from Obama.  After all his wife is buds with W.

     This question gets at the essence of the largely untold history of the Neocon/PNAC establishment in the Bush-Cheney administration-- Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Feith, and the "Prince of Darkness," Richard Perle.  These are the guys who coordinated the 9/11 Black Op-- their "new Pearl Harbor"-- as a pretext for implementing the PNAC "Wolfowitz Doctrine" in the Middle East.

      What was Obama's relationship with the Neocons?

      He pilloried John McCain in the 2008 Presidential debates for supporting the Iraq War debacle.  But, much to my surprise, Obama retained Robert Gates as Secretary of Defense, and largely went along with the PNAC playbook to de-stabilize Libya and Syria, even signing off on the CIA's Operation Timber Sycamore-- arming Sunni proxy militias (Al Qaeda, et.al.) to overthrow Assad, while ostensibly fighting "ISIS."

       Behind the scenes, Obama and Netanyahu could hardly stand to be in the same room together, but Obama seemed to begrudgingly acquiesce in the phony CIA/Neocon "War on Terror."  Nor did he pursue any bona fide investigations of Bush, Cheney, 9/11, or the Iraq WMD scam.  If he had, he would have been deep sixed.

     I read somewhere that Leon Panetta told Obama early on in his presidency that, "You can't just say, 'no,' to these guys"-- i.e., the CIA and Joint Chiefs.

    The last POTUS who did that was JFK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Chris, don't forget April Glaspie. And I agree about the awful effect of the sanctions.

 

I haven't read any of the extremist views about Obama.  Although I have heard about them.

But I think its pretty clear that he was a part of the club.

 Ray McGovern tells a good story about him.  Someone asked him, I think towards the beginning of his second term, "What happened to all the Hope and Change?" Obama replied,

"You saw what happened to Dr. King didn't you?"

At least the guy's honest.

That's a great quote and I am sure true. We can all scrutinise here from our armchairs but, when put in that position to do tremendous good for humanity at high risk to yourself/immediate family or, to be a 'yes' man and have a very comfortable life at the cost of people you don't know, I wonder how many of us looking at our children would choose to go against the grain? There is overwhelming data in psychology that power corrupts and so many start with all of the ideals in the world and the higher they climb, the more the reasons they started out with evaporate. 
But, I guess if you choose to be the 'yes' man, you don't get your place in history as a hero or a notable legacy. I think with JFK, the influence of god, his fatalism, with his historical heroes and having been told since a child that illness could take him at any time, I think he had a unique or rare outlook on life, shaping some of his behaviours. Another significant factor could have been that he was born with money, never wanted for anything in his life and the one thing he needed which was health, couldn't be bought. The one sure thing about people who have a tough upbringing is that when they get some money, they never want to experience those tough times again and will do anything to avoid that. So, candidates who started humble and are bankrolled by others, are much more or a sure thing when elected, their behaviour is predictable. I read a bit about Nixon and he was the opposite of JFK, he had his more modest upbringing and he resented having to play 'butler monkey' to the east coast power brokers with their old money and entitlement, or people like Prescott Bush, Allen Dulles (who I believe Nixon visited hoping for a job). In contrast Nixon would do all he could to hang on to the life he'd toiled for, he was more of a known quantity. Maybe Obama was too, nice family, made it to the number one job, nice bit of money put away, why rock the boat? Hope & change, did vanish and became business as usual. 

I heard a Bill Burr interview not so long ago and he succinctly described US politics in a few sentences. (2mins 58secs - 3mins 59secs)

It makes you wonder if the scene in Dallas was just the crudeness of a Texan murder or if it was setting an example? I mean, surely Max Jacobsen could have given JFK a dodgy dose including some of those fast acting cancer cells procured in New Orleans that potentially got Ruby? Or a plane crash? There are many ways that could potentially create less suspicion than bullets whizzing around in a Dealey Plaza full of witnesses. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Robert Wheeler said:

The playbook goes back to WWI with the "Rape of Belgium."

The Huns are bayoneting Belgian babies, America must join the war!

Bill deBlasio's (aka Warren Wilhelm Jr.) father and uncle (Warren Sr. and Donald George Wilhelm Jr.) helped install the Shah for Texaco and the CIA, respectively. Donald George Jr. would ghost write the Shah's memoirs in 1961.

The grandfather, Donald George Sr. worked the American side of the Belgian rape narrative for Herbert Hoover as a member of the Creel Commission, along with Edward Bernays.

On the Belgian side were the Lambert's and Prud'hommes, among others. It would be more accurate to call them agents of the London Rothschilds.

Hector P. Prud'homme helped lead the WWI effort and his son, Hector C., shows up in Iran in 1953 representing the World Bank's loan department, along with former Texaco CEO, Torkild Reiber.. 

Hector C. was also married to Richard Bissels sister. (Richard Bissell and Bob Mueller's mother were first cousins as well.)

Bringing things back to 2020, Bill DeBlasio is not the buffoonish clown he has been playing on TV during "Corona."

Belgian-Coke-Info-Graphic-1024x576.png?s

That's very interesting Robert, thank you.  I am told I should read Carroll Quigley's 'Tragedy & Hope' which potentially outlines this earlier stuff. I knew about the 'Bayonets & Babies' in WW1. Hitlers WW2 propaganda campaign was based largely on the highly effective British use of propaganda in the Boer Wars and WW1. It's no surprise that governments seeing how effective these tools were in wartime, began to incorporate a greater use of propaganda in peacetime. I am sure I read Sigmund Freud's nephew, Edward Bernay's was hired by the US government to assist them with this. He wrote the famous book 'Propaganda' in 1928.
Richard Bissell is actually someone I know very little about (aside from his firing) but, straight away I see he is a pal of Averell Harriman and another Yale alumni. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I understand, Bernay's book was a model for Goebbels.

And the plan to get us to invade Iraq might well have been drawn up by Bernays. It was that extensive and forceful..

I am just saying, IMO, there should have been an inquiry into this.

Nobody notices the irony?  Trump gets impeached over a quid pro quo phone call to Ukraine.

W ends up killing 600,000 Iraquis and 5,000 Americans over a pack of lies and Pelosi says, "Impeachment is off the table."

That is the kind of political culture we live in,.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

That is the kind of political culture we live in.

The kind of political culture where Trump can make a brazen dictatorial move to scuttle the 2020 election and many people can only bitch about Obama.

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

 

      What was Obama's relationship with the Neocons?

      He pilloried John McCain in the 2008 Presidential debates for supporting the Iraq War debacle.  But, much to my surprise, Obama retained Robert Gates as Secretary of Defense, and largely went along with the PNAC playbook to de-stabilize Libya and Syria, even signing off on the CIA's Operation Timber Sycamore-- arming Sunni proxy militias (Al Qaeda, et.al.) to overthrow Assad, while ostensibly fighting "ISIS."   

Are you sure about that?

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/obama-nixed-cia-plan-could-have-stopped-isis-officials-n549111

The CIA in 2012 proposed a detailed covert action plan designed to remove Syrian President Bashar Assad from power, but President Obama declined to approve it, current and former U.S. officials tell NBC News.

It’s long been known that then-CIA Director David Petraeus recommended a program to secretly arm and train moderate Syrian rebels in 2012 to pressure Assad. But a book to be published Tuesday by a former CIA operative goes further, revealing that senior CIA officials were pushing a multi-tiered plan to engineer the dictator’s ouster. Former American officials involved in the discussions confirmed that to NBC News.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-skeptics/obamas-syrian-chemical-weapons-legacy-so-bad-17512?nopaging=1

To critics of the entire "red-line" episode, the joint UN/OPCW report is proof that the Obama administration was made to look like a fool—that entering into an agreement and trusting that a dictator would willingly give up his most powerful weapons was the very definition of aloofness. But what these very same critics cannot answer is whether the alternative they were advocating at the time—using coordinated military force on Assad's chemical-weapons facilities—would have produced a better result than stepping back and negotiating the arsenal away. Would military force have destroyed 1,300 tons of sarin and VX nerve agent? Would it have allowed international inspectors to investigate Syria's chemical-weapons program for the first time in a very long time? Would military force have convinced the Assad regime to stop committing war crimes and crimes against humanity on its own people, especially when taking into account that a military campaign would not have consisted of a regime-changing mission?</q>
 
The attacks on Obama in this thread — especially in light of the current crisis — are absurd.

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somebody wrote:

Richard Bissell is actually someone I know very little about (aside from his firing) but, straight away I see he is a pal of Averell Harriman and another Yale alumni. 
 
Pal?  The word is “employee.”

http://www.irwincollier.com/yale-economics-ph-d-alumnus-1939-and-later-high-ranking-cia-official-bay-of-pigs/

Bissell entered public life by joining the Department of Commerce as Chief Economic Analyst of the Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce. He served in a variety of positions for federal agencies from 1942 until 1955 including the War Shipping Administration, the Office of War Mobilization and Reconversion, the Economic Cooperation Administration and the Mutual Security Agency. During this period Bissell returned to higher education as an associate professor (later professor) of economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology from 1946 until 1952. While at MIT, Bissell consulted for the Ford Foundation and authored “Notes on U.S. Strategy” following the preparation of National Security Council paper (NSC-141) on the allocation of resources to U.S. security programs. In writing the NSC paper, Bissell worked in conjunction with Frank Nash and Paul Nitze under the direction of the Secretary of State Dean Acheson, Secretary of Defense Robert Lovett, and Director of Mutual Security William Averell Harriman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Robert Wheeler said:

Me and some other merry Trump pranksters are going to stencil "Good Will" on the post office boxes in the neighborhood tomorrow so that Biden just gets a pile of old sweaters.

Wheeler is celebrating Trump’s sabotage of the Post Office?  

Of course! 
 
Fascists don’t believe in elections.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Robert Wheeler said:

It's not the culture, it's the structure.

You are either in the club or you are out.

12 years of Bushes, 8 years of Clinton and 8 years of Obama.

R&Ds playing for the same team that most of us are not on.

 

 

Jeanette Prud'homme. Her brother's drag racing career really took off after 1968. Jake the Snake.

She lives in Maine now, near Bar Harbour where the two Hector's used to Summer.

Not saying they are related. Just a curiosity for now.

Yes, it's a 'clique', one thats hard to fall out of. 

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

×
×
  • Create New...