FBI dropped the ball wrt Mossaoui

[Axxman300]

The creator of CIA, Truman, wrote an editorial a month after Kennedy's assassination saying the agency had gotten out of control and gone way beyond its original purpose as an intelligence-gathering organization and become a political policy enforcement organ it was never intended to be. It had become an organization not controlled by democracy. What message was Truman trying to send 1 month after Kennedy's assassination?

So a letter written in December, 1963 is relevant to anything in 2001 how?

Best shown in Douglass' book 'JFK And The Unspeakable'. It was this unprecedented effort towards detente with the communists that got JFK killed in Dallas in a coup d'etat.

Nope.

The Vietnam thing has always been the weakest of the JFK conspiro-dreck. JFK was responsible for the largest piece-time buildup of the US Military after Reagan. He and his brother were actively working to murder Castro, and the Berlin Wall had gone up under his watch. Kennedy wasn't going to make nice with Communists anywhere.

The fact is that in November 1963 JFK's odds of re-election were slim. Hearings had begun covering his affair with a communist spy that was due to hit the papers in January 1964. Everyone in D.C. was already writing him off as a 1-term guy.

I personally know a Laotian who was directly involved in all that. His father was Laotian military who advised CIA where to drop their bombs. He was a boy who saw people on bicycles vaporized to white ash by American bombs.

Neat. Gotta love Willie Pete.

Also, you either vaporize someone, or you bake them to ashes. Not both.

I know a 1963 VietNam vet whose missions he can't talk about. He was permanently shaken by those they left behind in the jungle.

Cool.

I knew a guy named Dave Maurer, he served with MACV-SOG. He never told me jack. (See, real name)

 

[BStrong]

Axx:

Cool.

I knew a guy named Dave Maurer, he served with MACV-SOG. He never told me jack. (See, real name)

There's been at least one comprehensive non-fiction book published on SOG:

http://www.amazon.com/Sog-Secret-Americas-Commandos-Vietnam/dp/0451195086

And the official history annex series on SOG has been declassified and released to the public:

MAC-V-SOG Command History Annexes A, N,& M (1964-1966): First Secrets of the Vietnam War, by Charles F. Reske.

MAC-V-SOG 1971-1972 Command History Annex B: The Last Secret of the Vietnam War, by Charles F. Reske. Two Volume set

Available from:

Alpha Publications
PO Box 308
Sharon Center, Ohio 44274

There are usually copies for sale on Ebay.

I've seen many CT believers throw out military jargon and specops acronyms in an effort to sound well informed, and the old Northwoods chestnut is never too far from being referenced.

Our new poster hits CT sop right across the board.

 

[Jetblast]

The Gulf Of Tonkin Incident is a legitimate reference to false flag attacks. I could repel the reply I got on Laos but I fear I will be off-topic hunted by persons who use it as a device.

It seems ridiculous to have to start a whole new thread because a poster was ignorant of the flood season in the Mekong and its prolific flows and 500-1000 meter width.

 

[Jetblast]

Axx:

Cool.

I knew a guy named Dave Maurer, he served with MACV-SOG. He never told me jack. (See, real name)

There's been at least one comprehensive non-fiction book published on SOG:

http://www.amazon.com/Sog-Secret-Americas-Commandos-Vietnam/dp/0451195086

And the official history annex series on SOG has been declassified and released to the public:

MAC-V-SOG Command History Annexes A, N,& M (1964-1966): First Secrets of the Vietnam War, by Charles F. Reske.

MAC-V-SOG 1971-1972 Command History Annex B: The Last Secret of the Vietnam War, by Charles F. Reske. Two Volume set

Available from:

Alpha Publications
PO Box 308
Sharon Center, Ohio 44274

There are usually copies for sale on Ebay.

I've seen many CT believers throw out military jargon and specops acronyms in an effort to sound well informed, and the old Northwoods chestnut is never too far from being referenced.

Our new poster hits CT sop right across the board.

I'd like to cite that deniers, when losing arguments, cite "derailing" and "off-topic" but then enter whole reams of totally off-topic material themselves without fear of moderation.

 

[Jetblast]

So a letter written in December, 1963 is relevant to anything in 2001 how?

It should be obvious. The rogue CIA shadow government that killed Kennedy was as in effect back then, as Truman cited, just as much as it was in effect during the false flag attack of 9-11. Only a person in contempt of the obvious would ask the question in my opinion.

 

[beachnut]

It should be obvious. The rogue CIA shadow government that killed Kennedy was as in effect back then, as Truman cited, just as much as it was in effect during the false flag attack of 9-11. Only a person in contempt of the obvious would ask the question in my opinion.

Wow, and this is related to Moussaoui through time travel or what? Like your failed claims on 800, JFK, and now 911; you got no evidence, you got woo.

Got the flight school list of 12? How many simulators are in the USA? You know the FAA has a list. What sim did Flight 93 practice on? Flight 77? How does this all tie together? So far all you have done is post nonsense not related to much more than an active imagination with bad fiction.

JFK and Moussaoui? How does that work?

 

[BStrong]

The Gulf Of Tonkin Incident is a legitimate reference to false flag attacks. I could repel the reply I got on Laos but I fear I will be off-topic hunted by persons who use it as a device.

It seems ridiculous to have to start a whole new thread because a poster was ignorant of the flood season in the Mekong and its prolific flows and 500-1000 meter width.

Please do go into detail about your knowledge of SEA.

I can't wait.

Back to the topic - Tonkin at best can be described as a failure of leadership on the part of the Captains involved, and either there was an attack, or there wasn't - what false flag plotter fired on the Maddox and Turner Joy?

 

[BStrong]

It should be obvious. The rogue CIA shadow government that killed Kennedy was as in effect back then, as Truman cited, just as much as it was in effect during the false flag attack of 9-11. Only a person in contempt of the obvious would ask the question in my opinion.

If they were such a power in government, why did they need to kill JFK? they could have easily formented incidents in SVN that would have made withdrawal of assistance impossible and expansion of involvement certain, without anywhere near the risk of discovery as a POTUS assassination on US soil.

 

[jaydeehess]

King of the Hill?

Yep, yep, yep.

 

[jaydeehess]

The Vietnam thing has always been the weakest of the JFK conspiro-dreck. JFK was responsible for the largest piece-time buildup of the US Military after Reagan. He and his brother were actively working to murder Castro, and the Berlin Wall had gone up under his watch. Kennedy wasn't going to make nice with Communists anywhere.

The fact is that in November 1963 JFK's odds of re-election were slim. Hearings had begun covering his affair with a communist spy that was due to hit the papers in January 1964. Everyone in D.C. was already writing him off as a 1-term guy.



Neat. Gotta love Willie Pete.

I have to laugh every time I see theJFK-was-soft-on-Communists meme. Sure, the ONLY POTUS to ever overtly threaten all out nuclear war on the USSR was demonstrating his sympathy for that political system.

 

[jaydeehess]

The Gulf Of Tonkin Incident is a legitimate reference to false flag attacks. I could repel the reply I got on Laos but I fear I will be off-topic hunted by persons who use it as a device.

It seems ridiculous to have to start a whole new thread because a poster was ignorant of the flood season in the Mekong and its prolific flows and 500-1000 meter width.

Jeebus Chris toes you still cannot fathom why your musings on what the FBI 'should have done' in 2000/2001 is not on topïic in a thread that sought answers from persons such as yourself as to what you would want done NOW? A topic to which your response has been woefully inadequate.

In this thread you have attempted to portray a history of events you declare is illustrative of a deep rogue element in the CIA, and apparently in upper echelons of the FBI, that works to its own agenda regardless of, and often in direct opposition to, the official agenda of the USA. You decry that others are posting their opinion and yet declare as fact your own slant, i.e. opinion, on these historical events.

Kennedy was hardly soft on Communism, his assassination the focus of wild speculations that never overcome the null hypothesis.

 

[jaydeehess]

It should be obvious. The rogue CIA shadow government that killed Kennedy was as in effect back then, as Truman cited, just as much as it was in effect during the false flag attack of 9-11. Only a person in contempt of the obvious would ask the question in my opinion.

The topic is failures in the Mossaoui handling by the FBI but if you are attempting to make a case for a long standing secret rogue element within the CIA then if you had any proof of it existing you'd post it. Instead you post as fact paranoid opinions of myriad other conspiracy theories.

Only a paranoid person would do that.

 

[BStrong]

I have to laugh every time I see theJFK-was-soft-on-Communists meme. Sure, the ONLY POTUS to ever overtly threaten all out nuclear war on the USSR was demonstrating his sympathy for that political system.

You're correct, but at the time of the CMC both my father and my uncle thought that JFK had already sold the Cubans down the river at the Bay of Pigs, and both thought we should have simply nuked Cuba the first moment we knew the missles were there.

In retrospect, that's some real cold warrior thinking, but that's what was talked about in my house.

 

[BStrong]

The topic is failures in the Mossaoui handling by the FBI but if you are attempting to make a case for a long standing secret rogue element within the CIA then if you had any proof of it existing you'd post it. Instead you post as fact paranoid opinions of myriad other conspiracy theories.

Only a paranoid person would do that.

Paranoid/willfully ignorant/whatever.

I love how the secret government can bump off Presidents, rig elections, topple governments, murder anyone in their way, 9/11 inside jobby-job, mopery with intent to creep, all sorts of malfesance, but their greatest enemy is some anon guy with a modem.

 

[jaydeehess]

You're correct, but at the time of the CMC both my father and my uncle thought that JFK had already sold the Cubans down the river at the Bay of Pigs, and both thought we should have simply nuked Cuba the first moment we knew the missles were there.

In retrospect, that's some real cold warrior thinking, but that's what was talked about in my house.

I am old enough to remember when nuke war was not as unthinkable as it is now. ICBMs did not exist, only medium ranges on nukes then. Only bombers could hit further. Not that I was born yet but only a generation off.
So the urge to fry Cuba was not as unthinkable wrt retaliation then.



Yeah, extreme treasons perpetrated over decades and yet it is being discovered by a few internet warriors putting 2.1 + π together and seeing a result of 42.

 

[BStrong]

I am old enough to remember when nuke war was not as unthinkable as it is now. ICBMs did not exist, only medium ranges on nukes then. Only bombers could hit further. Not that I was born yet but only a generation off.
So the urge to fry Cuba was not as unthinkable wrt retaliation then.



Yeah, extreme treasons perpetrated over decades and yet it is being discovered by a few internet warriors putting 2.1 + π together and seeing a result of 42.

I can tell you I remember the whole thing very clearly, and maybe my mother or some other woman held a divergent opinion, but every cop in the front room of our house or at the shop seemed to be in agreement with my father that JFK was a pussy and "the bomb" should be dropped on Cuba ASAP.

 

[000063]

So you're saying there's pressure on this site to avoid admitting the truth?


Isn't this tantamount to saying the majority are liars and therefore 9-11 was a conspiracy?

I think that's a biiit of a stretch.

I'd like to cite that deniers, when losing arguments, cite "derailing" and "off-topic" but then enter whole reams of totally off-topic material themselves without fear of moderation.

This would work better if a)regular posters were the same as mods, and b) this wasn't a tangent you started.

Please do go into detail about your knowledge of SEA.

I can't wait.
[...]

That's the big watery thing that boats sail on, right?

Yep, yep, yep.

We sell conspiracies and conspiracy accessories.

 

[BStrong]

I think that's a biiit of a stretch.



This would work better if a)regular posters were the same as mods, and b) this wasn't a tangent you started.

That's the big watery thing that boats sail on, right?



We sell conspiracies and conspiracy accessories.

Among other things.

That post of his had more clichés than a country song.

 

[Jetblast]

I have to laugh every time I see theJFK-was-soft-on-Communists meme. Sure, the ONLY POTUS to ever overtly threaten all out nuclear war on the USSR was demonstrating his sympathy for that political system.

Your entry conspicuously avoids the facts and references I provided in order to ruminate a false thesis. National Security Action Memorandum 263 called for the total removal of all US military personnel from VietNam by 1965. If you read 'JFK And The Unspeakable' you'll see how categorically wrong you are. JFK established back-channel communications with Khrushchev and was negotiating detente with him post-Cuban missile crisis. When he was assassinated Kennedy had french journalist Jean Daniel acting as his envoy to Castro in order to propose detente. Attwood also approached Cuban ambassador Carlos Lechuga. It was JFK who was approached by the generals, as was accurately shown in Stone's 'JFK', who asked him to launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike on the Soviet Union. JFK got angry, said they were crazy, and walked out of the room.

No posing Kennedy as being aggressive and a hawk is a common trick of the right to conceal what he really was and how it related to his assassination.

The above relates to the topic in the way that it evidences the true scene behind the Gulf Of Tonkin false flag and how that false flag was similar to 9-11. In the same vein JFK sought a neutralization pact in Laos that CIA was adamantly against.

 

[Jetblast]

If they were such a power in government, why did they need to kill JFK? they could have easily formented incidents in SVN that would have made withdrawal of assistance impossible and expansion of involvement certain, without anywhere near the risk of discovery as a POTUS assassination on US soil.

Because JFK was calling them on their bs and was trying to take control. Read 'JFK And The Unspeakable'. CIA set-off a bomb on the Buddhists in order to spark anger towards Diem and divide sympathies. They then blamed communist insurgents. Study of the bombing scene discovered the residue was that of a new plastic explosive only CIA possessed. CIA's E Howard Hunt helped forge telegrams from Kennedy that led to him taking blame for the CIA assassination of Diem.

What they did was put Johnson in the presidency, which made it easier to get whatever they wanted. It was a much more efficient method. Similar to the efficiency of total control with the son of an ex CIA Director George Bush being in the presidency.

The assassination of JFK gave CIA total power domestically and internationally. That's why they had to kill RFK, because like Jack, he was going to take control and right that.