|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
 Posted: Tue May 01, 2007 6:54 am Post subject: |
 |
|
John F. Kennedy Speech, April 27, 1961
"The President and the Press"
American Newspaper Publishers Association.
Waldorf-Astoria Hotel, New York, NY
Well worth listening to 
http://www.archive.org/details/jfks19610427 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Tue May 01, 2007 8:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
JFK Murder Plot "Deathbed Confession"
Aired On National Radio
Former CIA agent, Watergate conspirator E. Howard Hunt names the men who killed Kennedy
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Monday, April 30, 2007
The "deathbed confession" audio tape in which former CIA agent and Watergate conspirator E. Howard Hunt admits he was approached to be part of a CIA assassination team to kill JFK was aired this weekend - an astounding development that has gone completely ignored by the establishment media.
Saint John Hunt, son of E. Howard Hunt, appeared on the nationally syndicated Coast to Coast AM radio show on Saturday night to discuss the revelations contained in the tape.
Hunt said that his father had mailed cassette the tape to him alone in January 2004 and asked that it be released after his death. The tape was originally 20 minutes long but was edited down to four and a half minutes for the Coast to Coast broadcast. Hunt promises that the whole tape will be uploaded soon at his website.
Click here to listen to a clip of the tape.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2007/300407deathbedconfession.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kurva anjad
Joined: 19 Apr 2007
|
| Posted: Tue May 01, 2007 6:00 pm Post subject: Re: The JFK Execution would disturb viewers, also. |
|
|
| regicide wrote: |
JFK was lured to Dealy Plaza where he was executed by elements of his own government.
It is not until you realize that our beloved President was first shot in the neck to paralize him, then was shot in the back , but the shot was what the military calls a "short shot" which means the powder didn't explode properly and didn't give sufficient power to make the bullet fatal, do you begin to realize the brutality of the slaying.
Then, according to eyewitness accounts , the driver stopped the car , and Kennedy was thrown violently backwards from a shot to his right temple, as seen in the Zapruder film.
The Zapruder film was not seen by the public until it was shown on Geraldo Rivera 12 years after the murder.
In another thread Maggie Jarvis, a science teacher, has criticised those historians who have spent a lot of time studying the assassination of John F. Kennedy: "I cannot support the level and type of discussion that you are all so keen on. Why do you not pool your collective intelligence and tackle something more relevant to today - the atrocities that are taking place at this very moment could do with serious investigation. Perhaps that would lead to fewer people alive at this moment losing them before they should! I repeat - John Kennedy is dead."
The study of history is always about the present and not the past. Historians help us understand the situation we find ourselves in. It is because we need to understand the situation in Iraq today that we need to study events like the assassination of JFK.
Here are a few quotations that make this very important point:
�The aim of the historian, like that of the artist, is to enlarge our picture of the world, to give us a new way of looking at things.� (James Joll)
�The disadvantage of men not knowing the past is that they do not know the present.� (G. K. Chesterton)
�Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe� (H. G. Wells)
�More history is made by secret handshakes than by battles, bills and proclamations.� (John Barth)
�Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.� (George Santayana)
�It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.� (Voltaire)
Over the last few years I have come to the conclusion that it is impossible to understand current events without understanding our �secret history�. Since the emergence of democracy and the mass media it has become vitally important for those in power to hide certain information from the public. The intelligence services have played a very important part in this attempt to conceal this information from the public. So much so that they have become an important political force. In fact, they have become a crucial aspect of what Dwight Eisenhower called in January, 1961 the military-industrial complex.
I am afraid most of the general public have not grasped this point and still believe the information provided by the government. I think there are psychological reasons for this desire to believe that our government tells us the truth. If the government is using the intelligence services to manipulate the truth, do we actually live in a democracy?
The war in Iraq is a good example of this. Blair would never had been able to order troops into Iraq if the British people had the full facts about WMD. Anybody who has spent anytime at all in studying this issue will be aware that MI5 and MI6 worked closely with the Blair government to conceal the truth about WMD. The CIA and FBI did similar things in the United States.
In most cases the security services work in the interests of the government of the day. However, on occasions, these organizations have worked independently of the government. In some cases, they have followed a policy that has attempted to undermine the government. For example, we now have evidence that this happened in Britain during the governments of Ramsay MacDonald (1923-24) and Harold Wilson (1964-70) and (1974-76).
It is clear that a similar thing was going on during 1962-63 in America. This resulted in the assassination of the democratically elected president. To my mind you could not have a more important event to study. Not because it is vitally important to find out who fired the actual shots. The most important aspect of this case is to find out who ordered this assassination and who was involved in covering it up. Until this is done the CIA and the FBI will not be brought under democratic control. The same is true in Britain. MI5 and MI6 and our corrupt government will not be brought under control until we find out the full facts about how they manipulated public opinion over WMD in Iraq.
John Simkin
Biography: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=1365
General Website: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk
JFK Website: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKindex.htm
Watergate: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/watergate.htm
Operation Mockingbird: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKmockingbird.htm
Spartacus Travel Guide: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/travelguide.htm
Hi John.
...and of course, don't forget your George Orwell...
"Those who control the past, control the future; Those who control the future, control the present; Those who control the present, control the past."
Agreed on all points. Seems that our 2 Nations have worked together on many occasions in the past; particularly in the Middle East, when 'black gold' is at stake.
How can one promote widespread change without first concluding, with consensus, that a problem exists to begin with?
Empire and Nationhood
by Mary Ann Heiss
"In 1951 prime minister Mohammed Mossadegh seized British oil holdings in Iran. The move set in motion four years of bitter political and strategic battles between a United Kingdom desperate for an economic rebound and an increasingly anti-Western regime in Teheran. The Eisenhower administration tried to broker a settlement, but Mossadegh was overthrown by an Anglo-American operation and replaced by the Shah. Mary Ann Heiss provides the most detailed account available of this turning point in cold war history. The first American effort to bolster a crumbling British Empire; and the first effort by the CIA to overthrow a popular nationalist regime."
The end result was a shared portion of the profits in what was before a Dutch / British concern. When the US whisked away the despot, the Shah, after a brutal campaign of terror and execution, the Iranians responded in the only way they could - through the taking of hostages at the US Embassy. No one seemed to know the reason as I recall, only that the Iranians were fanatics and that the Ayatollah Khomeini was Satan.
Here's an interesting one:
Britain Says U.S. Planned to Seize Oil in '73 Crisis
by Lizette Alvarez
LONDON � The United States government seriously contemplated using military force to seize oil fields in the Middle East during the Arab oil embargo 30 years ago, according to a declassified British government document made public on Thursday.
The top-secret document says that President Richard M. Nixon was prepared to act more aggressively than previously thought to secure America's oil supply if the embargo, imposed by Arab nations in retaliation for America's support for Israel in the 1973 Middle East war, did not end. In fact, the embargo was lifted in March 1974.
The declassified British memorandum said the United States considered launching airborne troops to seize oil fields in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Abu Dhabi, but only as a "last resort."
President Nixon's defense secretary, James R. Schlesinger, delivered the warning to Lord Cromer, the British ambassador in Washington at the time. In the document, Lord Cromer was quoted as saying of Mr. Schlesinger, "it was no longer obvious to him that the United States could not use force."
The seizure of the oil fields was "the possibility uppermost in American thinking when they refer to the use of force," the memorandum said.
The potential for such a military action was taken so seriously by British intelligence services that a report was written listing the most likely scenarios for the use of American force in the Middle East and the consequences of each. The report, dated Dec. 12, 1973, was titled "UK Eyes Alpha" and was sent to Prime Minister Edward Heath.
The memorandum was one of hundreds of documents released by Britain's National Archives under a law that makes government papers public after 30 years. Details of the document were reported on Thursday by The Washington Post.
The exchange between Mr. Schlesinger and Lord Cromer came on the heels of the war between Israel and Egypt and Syria that began in October 1973. As retaliation for American support for Israel in the war and in an effort to sway world opinion, Arab members of OPEC imposed the oil embargo.
The embargo led to petroleum shortages around the world and to sharp increases in the price of gas in the United States.
As recounted by Lord Cromer, Mr. Schlesinger told him the United States was unwilling to abide threats by "underdeveloped, underpopulated" countries.
The document did not rule out the possibility that Washington would consider pre-emptive strikes if Arab governments, "elated by the success of the oil weapon," began issuing greater demands.
"The U.S. government might consider that it could not tolerate a situation in which the U.S. and its allies were in effect at the mercy of a small group of unreasonable countries," the document said.
As outlined in the memorandum, military action would be relatively straightforward: two brigades were estimated to be needed to seize the Saudi oil fields and one each for Kuwait and Abu Dhabi. In the case of Abu Dhabi, the Americans might ask for British military cooperation.
The greatest threat would arise in Kuwait, the document said, "where the Iraqis, with Soviet backing, might be tempted to intervene."
The British warned in their assessment that any occupation of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Abu Dhabi might have to last as long as 10 years. The use of force would also alienate Arab countries and irritate Moscow, although a military confrontation with the Soviet Union would be unlikely, the document said.
Discontent among Western allies was also cited as a possible consequence of military action. "Since the United States would probably claim to be acting for the benefit of the West as a whole and would expect the full support of allies, deep U.S.-European rifts could ensue," it said.
A separate document, also just released, illustrated Mr. Heath's profound anger toward Mr. Nixon, when the American president failed to inform the British prime minister he was putting American forces on a global nuclear alert during the Middle East war.
Mr. Heath went so far as to suggest that Mr. Nixon issued the alert in an attempt to deflect attention away from Watergate, which was in full swing in the fall of 1973.
"An American President in the Watergate position apparently prepared to go to such lengths at a moment's notice without consultation with his allies," Mr. Heath wrote in the second document, adding that there was no "military justification" for putting American forces on a nuclear alert at the time.
The alert was ordered after Leonid I. Brezhnev, the Soviet leader, warned that he might send Soviet troops into the Middle East after Israel crossed the Suez Canal.
Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0102-01.htm
Bush failed utterly to convince me that the Iraqi people required our help. I scoffed at the WMD. I said, and it's nice to be right, that Iraq was part of his political agenda the day he was sworn in to office.
Reminds me of the essence of the Pentagon papers.
- lee |
Loon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cosmo
Joined: 09 Nov 2006
|
| Posted: Tue May 01, 2007 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| regicide wrote: |
Now, you are comparing Anti-Semitism to believing there was a conspiracy to kill JFK?
Again, actions designed to divert attention away from the subject at hand.
|
Abraham Lincoln and JFK were Jewish.
They were shot in the temple. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
regicide
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Location: United States
|
| Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 1:27 pm Post subject: The Killing of a King |
|
|
| cbclark4 wrote: |
Disturbing evidence about the OP.
"Regicide: The Official Assassination of John F. Kennedy (Monte Sano Media, 2002, ISBN 1-59148-297-6) by Gregory Douglas, purports to be based on files from former CIA official Robert Crowley. In fact, Crowley never met Douglas and regarded him as an eccentric.
The book alleges that there was a conspiracy to kill U.S. President John F. Kennedy, and that the CIA had a central role in the assassination. JFK researchers, both conspiracy and lone nut, have doubts over the authenticity of Douglas' book and the document reproduced inside."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regicide:_The_Official_Assassination_of_John_F._Kennedy
cbc |
One might try finding a definition of a word in a dictionary, not wikipedia. And then you come up with a book title, no less. Just a suggestion, "cbc"
The book by that name , fyi, is disinformation.
The broad definition of regicide is the deliberate killing of a monarch, or the person responsible for it. In a narrower sense, in the British tradition, it refers to the judicial execution of a king after alleged due process of law.
The book alleges that there was a conspiracy to kill U.S. President John F. Kennedy, and that the CIA had a central role in the assassination. JFK researchers, both conspiracy and lone nut, have doubts over the authenticity of Douglas' book and the document reproduced inside." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
regicide
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Location: United States
|
| Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 1:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stevemcgarrett wrote: |
regicide:
Hey, genius, if you're going to use a JFK quote, you could at least spell those few words correctly. 
You do know that most of Profiles in Courage was ghost-written?
Sorry to shatter your illusions.
Read the "Dark Side of Camelot" and other books trashing the Kennedy legacy. I have no illusions about this man. I do own a signed first edition copy of the book for investment purposes though. Check the price on that.
Refute item by item Gerald Posner's Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK.
Then again, maybe you should avoid doing so, as it might awaken you to reality and then you'd have nothing left to salivate over. |
The fact that you believe in Posner's Case Closed, says it all, McGarret. ( did I spell that right?)
OJ Should Hire Posner, July 11, 2006
Reviewer: A reader - See all my reviews
This book is uniformly praised by ignorant people who want to believe the Warren Commission. Posner saw an opportunity to take their money, and he took it. Good for him. I'm sure if there was a sizable market of people wanting to believe OJ was innocent, he'd write that book too, with all sorts of convincing "scientific" evidence. Take a look at Weisberg's Case Open, if you can find it , for documentation of some of Posner's more amusing misrepresentations.
Point by point you want? One reviewer has done that. ( as well as the whole book, Case Open)
Okay where to start? probably the best way is to get my copy and open a page at random. I havepretty good chance of cf finding a misrepresented claim or a reference that doesn't say what Posner says it does.
Page 51.
Posner quotes from his interview of a KGB agent who defected in 1964 by the name of Yuriy Nosenko. Nosenko told him that the KGB ordered mental evaluations of Oswald. Posner claims that according to Nosenko the psychiatrists said that Oswald was mentally unstable.
Unfortunately for Posner, the Soviet reports are provided in Warren Commission volume 18.
They flatly contradict this false claim.
Nosenko should also be considered a discredited witness as he was caught in several lies by the The House Select Committee on Assassinations
They reported that Nosenko presented "significant inconsistencies" in his statements given to the FBI, the CIA and the Select Committee itself.
Shall I choose another page at random?
If Posner had the truth on his side there would no need to falisfy references.
Okay, here we go...
Page 127. Posner claims that on May 29, 1963 Oswald "'went to the Jones Printing Company" to order 1000 pro-Cuba handbills.
His reference for this is an FBI report by Special agent John M. McCarthy concerning McCarthy's interview of Myra Silver. When shown a photograph of Oswald she was unable to recognize him as the man who ordered the handbills from her. So what we have here is a classic Posnerism. He cites testimony that contradicts the point it is supposed to support.
Oh what the heck, one more for fun, I had to laugh at this one
Page 273.
Posner's was so anxious to debunk the story about three tramps arrested in Dealey Plaza after the assassination, he commits one of his most comical errors.
Posner said that one of the tramps was identified as "Buddy Harrelson." Somehow, Posner got the father of actor Woody Harrelson confused with another man named Harrelson. Who's next, Buddy Hackett?
Charles Harrelson is in jail for the murder of a federal judge and once claimed he was a shooter on the Grassy Knoll. Buddy Harrelson is a former infielder with the New York Mets. ( he is now deceased)
Not the kind of errors we expect to see in a "scholarly" report.
Further it is difficult to refute his evidence since he really didn't present any. In the entire book there is not the first shred of definitive evidence showing that Oswald did it. Considering that the title is "Case Closed" that seems a bit ambitious.
Did I miss something here? All this is is a confusing collection of minutia in an attempt to obfuscate thwe real evidence, none of which Ponser even attempted to refute. Want an example: the impossibility of the shot Oswald made. The worlds BEST snipers such as Col Craig Roberts tells that the reasons why the shots are impossible even with professional equipment which Oswald did NOT have. On this Posner is silent.
This book bolsters the Oswald lone-nut case until someone actually reads it and checks his |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
regicide
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Location: United States
|
| Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 1:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| regicide wrote: |
| ...This is called a discussion board, either discuss or stay away. |
What do you think of "the Jews," Regicide? |
I am still waiting for your apology for calling me an anti-semite, Gopher. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
