Jump to content
The Education Forum

Murder begets murder, until the cycle is broken.


Lynne Foster
 Share

Recommended Posts

William Kelly posted this fascinating claim in the Lennon thread:

Chapman most certainly fits in with the Siran/Hinkley/Castillo mold, that he worked at one of the refugee camps where there were multible intelligence agency ops going on, and that a bay of pigs veteran would be on security at the scene, certainly makes it easier to follow the able danger dots, if anyone has the inclination to do so. I think Jan Weiner had a foia law suit on Lennon's goverment file, which documents the amount of effort the government put aganst Lennon.

There certainly are legitimate lone nuts out there - Howard Unruh comes to mind, but there's also those who have demonstratable associations with the government's mind-control/assassination programs of the 50s-70s, certainly don't qualify for lone nut category any more than Osawld does.

At first and for a long time I was unconvinced that the assassinations of JFK, MLK and RFK were related, but indeed they remain unsolved homicides, and I know that if the killers of JFK, or even Medgar Evers, were pursued and prosecuted, where ever the chips may fall, then MLK and RFK would still be alive today.

I am not as eloquant as Mr. Kelly is, I had posted the following, (misprints and all)

Richard Nixon claimed that J. Edgar Hoover was his HIS "crony" and Trickie Dickie merely picked up where his crony left off.

I think, er, you are quite naive, if you dout Tricky Dicky's involvement.

Read all the books where Nixon talks about what a "phony" John Lennon was, and how much better the US would be, if his kind were stone cold "neutralized".

The murders of John Kennedy, Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy are serial, they are not isolated incidents, and Richard Nixon, who claims that Hoover was his crony, voluntarily offered the fact that he was Hoover's accomplice.

No wonder Nixon and Hoover manufactured the claim that Oswald had tried to kill him, before he allegedly murdered President Kennedy -- Nixon was so absolutely full of himself, he couldn't avoid proving his complicity.

Tim Gatz predictably rammed in his objection, as he always does:

I object to Lynne's attempt to what was intended to be a "tribute" of sorts to the memory of John Lennon into an anti-Nixon diatribe.

I responded:

Objection overruled. YOU are the one who asked for real information Tim, and I think that the one who is evidently responsible for the murder of John Lennon, should be exposed.

Didn't you lose your license to practice law?

I have heard that Nixon's estate still expends milions of dollars every year to protect his reputation is that what Tim Gatz is all about?

I frankly do not understand why anybody would otherwise defend a felon like Richard Nixon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nixon post begets Nixon post (with or without a Mat Wilson link), until the cycle is broken. (Only John Simkin can break it.)

You didn't have to post that, I could see it coming.

The question is; If the Nixon estate wanted to find somebody to protect Nixon's reputation, would they look in the Yellow pages, under "disbarred", or under Ron Ecker, who claims that Nixon was in Dallas on November 22nd, to give the assassins what he called "moral support".

If that's true Ron, why do you object to a discussion about Richard Nixon's evident complicity in the assassinations of HIS political adversaries?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lynee, you rant like a fool about this but you have yet to post one scintilla of evidence to link Nixon to any murder.

I think everybody knows that all his Bay of Pigs references are about the assassination of John F. Kennedy and all of his talk about being a peace activist betray his obsession to assassinate real peace activists like John Lennon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nixon post begets Nixon post (with or without a Mat Wilson link), until the cycle is broken. (Only John Simkin can break it.)

You didn't have to post that, I could see it coming.

The question is; If the Nixon estate wanted to find somebody to protect Nixon's reputation, would they look in the Yellow pages, under "disbarred", or under Ron Ecker, who claims that Nixon was in Dallas on November 22nd, to give the assassins what he called "moral support".

If that's true Ron, why do you object to a discussion about Richard Nixon's evident complicity in the assassinations of HIS political adversaries?

There's more here, didn't you read it yet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stephen Turner
Of course Lynne, would you like my address aswell? A friend will be fixing it, so there will be no charge, but I will quiet happily refer you to him to rid of all those viruses you must have on your computer.

Your not the only one Adam, I spent several happy hours "Debugging" my rig after visiting one of Toxic Tina's little offerings. See also Gerry, Dawn, Terry etc. Proceed with extreme caution....

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...