"CIA killed JFK without a doubt" -- Jack Dorsey

[Leslie Sharp]

28 minutes ago, Karl Kinaski said:

@Leslie Sharpsaid, quote:

Help me find Biden's and I will change sides. 

Touché!

[W. Niederhut]

46 minutes ago, Karl Kinaski said:

@Leslie Sharpsaid, quote:

Help me find Biden's and I will change sides. 

Get a clue, Karl.

Biden's brain?  

How about Keynesian "Bidenomics" vs. Trump's multi-trillion dollar "trickle down" economic tax cut for billionaires and corporations?

How did the moronic 2017 Trump tax cut work out as an economic stimulus?

Trump's record low job and GDP growth numbers were even worse than George W. Bush's-- following Dubya's massive 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for billionaires.

How about Biden's incentives for clean energy vs. Trump's moronic roll back of environmental regulations for Big Oil and withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accords?

How about Biden's mass vaccination program vs. Trump's deadly, moronic bungling of the COVID pandemic?

Do you, perchance, get your fake news from Rupert Murdoch's SKY Television?

Edited July 9, 2023 by W. Niederhut

[Kirk Gallaway]

5 hours ago, Karl Kinaski said:

I do not need a 1984. IMO there are two possibilities for the US in 2024: RFK jr is your next president and the JFKA riddle will be solved and there will be an end of US warmongering all over the world or something will happening to RFK jr and then the US country will go to hell. 

Karl: there are 2  possibilities.

Oh let me get out my pen and get this down!

RFK Jr. is your next president

Boy I don't think so.

Karl: the Jfk riddle will be solved.

Because the CIA was thorough to fully document their hand in the JFKA and leave a smoking gun because Tucker says so? I hate to say it but even apart from that, it looks like there' never be a smoking gun. IMO

Karl: there will be an end of US warmongering all over the world

How would you ever make that connection?. Is that based on anything?

Karl:or something  will happen RFK jr and then the US country will go to hell. 

I see

Whew! Karl i can only assume you're a person whose had many of his dreams throughout his life dashed, and rather than revise your thinking and modify your inputs, it will always come back to the culprits being those Americans with their "deep state". Right?

Have you ever even been to the U.S.? And yet you retain this worshiping of U.S. billionaires that you thought this was at all significant? So why is anything Jack Dorsey says significant to you? You're certainly more in awe of billionaires than the typical American, who resents them.

I assume this has been because we've done such a good job of mind muddling . So thorough is our control ,that all we have to do is utter is "CIA" and "American exceptionalism" and we win the psychological war without even firing a shot.

5 hours ago, Karl Kinaski said:

On the contrary: The danger comes from governments playing god by deplatforming you and punishing you for thought crimes. I do not need a 1984.

Karl,

Do you realize the EU is much more regulatory on internet commerce than the U.S. and yet it's of no interest to you to keep yourself out of 1984 but you seem to vicariously live out your citizenship through the U.S.?

Up to now, Internet governance in the U.S. has been described as everything from a "privatized model" to a "hands off internet approach". The reality is in Congress both parties complain about the internet but only about each parties specific issues. So they've never gotten any legislation together. 

The EU  have historically been far more willing to embrace internet  regulation than in the United States and have taken firm stands against Apple, Microsoft, Google, Amazon, and Facebook. If you hear billionaires like Dorsey talk about it. All of that regulation is a detriment to "free speech."

It's the billionaires that have sucked you into this absolutist free speech model because they fear being sued by governments in the future.

 

 

[Benjamin Cole]

7 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

Wait... So Trump being bad messes with your worldview where the REAL bad guys are unseen bureaucrats?

I'm sorry to mess with your fantasy. But when you study human nature and American politics in tandem it's INCREDIBLY clear the largest threat to Democracy in the U.S. from day one, has been an Imperial Presidency--where a President feels he is a king, and can violate the law willy-nilly, and overturn elections, etc. 

Trump has been the founders' worst nightmare, not Allen Dulles, nor Richard Helms, nor J. Edgar Hoover. Those men could be fired, and the first two were, essentially. One of the key points about Watergate which is missed by those anxious to paint Nixon as a victim is that the Plumbers unit was formed because J. Edgar Hoover--freaklin' Hoover!!!--wasn't corrupt enough for Nixon's tastes. I mean, Mark Felt may have been a total tool in most every respect, but he was sickened by the FBI's being turned into a finger puppet of Nixon's--in the form of L. Pat Gray--and decided to do something about it. Long live Deep Throat! And if that is what you'd like us too fear (Deep Throat=Deep State or some such thing), Long live the Deep State!

 

Well, we are just on different page on this one. 

I will cite three examples.

1. LBJ, who was deeply a part of establishment Washington, so much so he immersed the US into a counterproductive war costing several million lives in SE Asia at Deep State urging. 

2. The Bushes, who helped immerse the US into not one but two fantastically expensive and counter-productive wars, also at establishment-Deep State urging. 

3. The gigantic security-surveillance state created before and after 9/11. Party hacks are aligned with the security state, but outsiders, like RFK Jr. and Trump, are unaligned with the security state. 

On top of everything else, Trump is mortal. But Washington establishment last forever, and corporatism survives through the ages---read Smedley Butler.  Butler in some ways describes the 2020s.

Trump was a crooked bonsai tree in a redwood forest of anti-democratic institutions. 

This is not MAGA talk. 

 

 

 

 

[Pat Speer]

49 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Well, we are just on different page on this one. 

I will cite three examples.

1. LBJ, who was deeply a part of establishment Washington, so much so he immersed the US into a counterproductive war costing several million lives in SE Asia at Deep State urging. 

2. The Bushes, who helped immerse the US into not one but two fantastically expensive and counter-productive wars, also at establishment-Deep State urging. 

3. The gigantic security-surveillance state created before and after 9/11. Party hacks are aligned with the security state, but outsiders, like RFK Jr. and Trump, are unaligned with the security state. 

On top of everything else, Trump is mortal. But Washington establishment last forever, and corporatism survives through the ages---read Smedley Butler.  Butler in some ways describes the 2020s.

Trump was a crooked bonsai tree in a redwood forest of anti-democratic institutions. 

This is not MAGA talk. 

 

 

 

 

I don't really think we're that far apart. I just don't think it's appropriate to paint Trump as a victim of anything, when he would have gladly killed you and me and the kiddos down the street to hold onto power, and paint the White House gold. 

It should be pointed out, however, that the advisers surrounding LBJ and the Bushes were not Rumpelstilskin-like weirdos waltzing in from the closet but hand-picked advisers that they could and, often did, fire, when they wouldn't tell them what they wanted to hear. Witness McNamara--who was given the quick boot after seeing the pointlessness of the war in Vietnam, and urging LBJ to head in another direction. 

 

[Benjamin Cole]

28 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

I don't really think we're that far apart. I just don't think it's appropriate to paint Trump as a victim of anything, when he would have gladly killed you and me and the kiddos down the street to hold onto power, and paint the White House gold. 

It should be pointed out, however, that the advisers surrounding LBJ and the Bushes were not Rumpelstilskin-like weirdos waltzing in from the closet but hand-picked advisers that they could and, often did, fire, when they wouldn't tell them what they wanted to hear. Witness McNamara--who was given the quick boot after seeing the pointlessness of the war in Vietnam, and urging LBJ to head in another direction. 

 

Yes, likely we agree much on much, and I hope someday you join me in voting for RFK Jr. 

I predicted Trump would gild the White House gold, so perhaps my insights are lacking. 

It seems to me presidential advisers get fired whenever they balk at security state imperatives. 

I wish Trump would disappear from the scene. 

Sadly, Trump has done a great service for the Deep State.

The Donks, who in the past cast (on occasion) a wary eye on the Deep State (remember Frank Church) now embrace a security state alliance with heart and soul. 

The establishment wing of the 'Phants were aways Deep State apparatchiks, and remain so.

Alliances among party establishments and the Deep State have a long history.  All serve the same ultimate masters, and have, going back to at least Smedley Butler's time.  

Trump's history in DC will be brief. 

But the powers of the security state have expanded to make 1984-settings look primitive.  

As usual, just IMHO...

 

 

 

[Michael Griffith]

On 7/7/2023 at 2:58 PM, Karl Kinaski said:

Dorsey, quote: "They were pushing him (JFK) to do unnatural things like what happened in Cuba and to do unnatural things like  Vietnam."

Jack Dorsey and the JFKA

The list of high profil JFKA CTers is growing.

It is good that a billionaire with his own social media platorm now publicly says that JFK was killed by a conspiracy. However, it is not so good that he appears to have accepted the far-left version of the conspiracy position. If someone reaches him with the facts about JFK's Cuba and Vietnam policies, he may become disillusioned with the case for conspiracy.

When JFK realized that the Russians had lied to him about not putting missiles in Cuba, he privately remarked, as recorded on the White House tapes, that "it shows the Bay of Pigs was really right, if we had done it right" (10/16/1962).There is ample evidence that JFK never lost interest in toppling the Castro regime, and that he was fully prepared to increase the destructive pressure on the regime either to persuade Castro to reach an acceptable resolution or in the event Castro refused to do so. 

There was nothing "unnatural" about our noble effort to keep 18 million South Vietnamese from falling under Communist tyranny, just as there was nothing unnatural about our war to keep 20 million South Koreans from falling under Communist rule. JFK did not need any "pushing" from the CIA on this issue. JFK warned about the dangers of a Communist takeover of South Vietnam years before he became president. And, the White House tapes prove beyond any rational doubt that JFK was determined not to let the Communists win in South Vietnam. Bobby's April 1964 oral interview reflects this determination. 

 

Edited July 10, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[Benjamin Cole]

11 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

It is good that a billionaire with his own social media platorm now publicly says that JFK was killed by a conspiracy. However, it is not so good that he appears to have accepted the far-left version of the conspiracy position. If someone reaches him with the facts about JFK's Cuba and Vietnam policies, he may become disillusioned with the case for conspiracy.

When JFK realized that the Russians had lied to him about not putting missiles in Cuba, he privately remarked, as recorded on the White House tapes, that "it shows the Bay of Pigs was really right, if we had done it right" (10/16/1962).There is ample evidence that JFK never lost interest in toppling the Castro regime, and that he was fully prepared to increase the destructive pressure on the regime either to persuade Castro to reach an acceptable resolution or in the event Castro refused to do so. 

There was nothing "unnatural" about our noble effort to keep 18 million South Vietnamese from falling under Communist tyranny, just as there was nothing unnatural about our war to keep 20 million South Koreans from falling under Communist rule. JFK did not need any "pushing" from the CIA on this issue. JFK warned about the dangers of a Communist takeover of South Vietnam years before he became president. And, the White House tapes prove beyond any rational doubt that JFK was determined not to let the Communists win in South Vietnam. Bobby's April 1964 oral interview reflects this determination. 

 

Given that US elites---Wall Street, Silicon Valley, entertainment---are happy to do hundreds of billions of dollars of business every year with the Communist Party of China--which, btw gave $5 mil or so to the Bidens---what say you now about the Asian wars "against communism"?

Were the Asian wars really wars "against communism"---or wars to keep markets and labor pools available to Western economic and financial elites? 

At present, there has been 20 years and counting of stomach-churning de-liberalization in Beijing.

Apple, BlackRock, JP Morgan, Disney, NBC Universal, Tesla, GM, Microsoft---you name it, they curry favor with Beijing communists, and send Biden and Treasury Secy Janey Yellen on missions to make nice with the commie rulers. 

So...what was the Vietnam War really about? 

If we sent 60,000 boys to die for in war against Asian communism, and killed up to 6 million in SE Asia---we are US elites so deeply in bed with Beijing commies now? 

[Michael Griffith]

12 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

 

Given that US elites---Wall Street, Silicon Valley, entertainment---are happy to do hundreds of billions of dollars of business every year with the Communist Party of China--which, btw gave $5 mil or so to the Bidens---what say you now about the Asian wars "against communism"?

I think you are comparing apples to oranges. China has come a long way since Mao Tse Tung. China has largely abandoned socialism, and as a result economic conditions are far better now than they were under Mao. China is still a repressive regime, to be sure, but it is not as repressive as it used to be. China allows a degree of religious freedom that was unknown under Mao. My church (the LDS Church) has a sizable membership in China and just received permission to build a second LDS temple in China. This would have been impossible under Mao. 

Were the Asian wars really wars "against communism"---or wars to keep markets and labor pools available to Western economic and financial elites? 

I think this is a sad and cynical view. Look at South Korea today compared to North Korea. We fought to keep South Korea free, and South Korea, with our help, has performed an economic miracle since the war. South Vietnam could have done the same thing if the Democrat-dominated Congress had not betrayed them and slashed aid less than a year after the Paris Peace Accords.

At present, there has been 20 years and counting of stomach-churning de-liberalization in Beijing.

See above.

Apple, BlackRock, JP Morgan, Disney, NBC Universal, Tesla, GM, Microsoft---you name it, they curry favor with Beijing communists, and send Biden and Treasury Secy Janey Yellen on missions to make nice with the commie rulers. 

But this cuts both ways. China is enormously, critically reliant on U.S. trade. We could crash the Chinese economy in a matter of weeks, if we wanted to do so, by slapping prohibitive tariffs on Chinese goods. Yes, we would suffer too, but not as much. Mitt Romney was wise to point this out in 2012. Trump pointed it out a few weeks ago. China needs us a lot more than we need China.

So...what was the Vietnam War really about? 

That is easy and simple: It was about trying to keep 18 million South Vietnamese from falling under the same kind of brutal tyranny that the people of North Korea and North Vietnam suffered under.

If we sent 60,000 boys to die for in war against Asian communism, and killed up to 6 million in SE Asia---we are US elites so deeply in bed with Beijing commies now? 

That is a false comparison and a false-choice argument. Again, look at South Korea. Or, look at Thailand and Indonesia, which we helped to resist communism. As many scholars have pointed out, our prolonged presence in South Vietnam gave courage to the Thai and Indonesian governments and peoples to resist communism. Look at Cambodia after the Communists were finally ousted from power.