Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

brooklynite

(94,534 posts)
Sat Nov 23, 2013, 12:35 AM Nov 2013

Hmm, how many Kennedy CT threads will I have trashed by Monday?

Allowing the the number of threads posted, the number that get pushed off my current page by other stuff and one six hour plane flight when I won't have internet access?

(nb - a CT thread is any thread discussing them -- pro or con -- or proposing them)

20 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Hmm, how many Kennedy CT threads will I have trashed by Monday? (Original Post) brooklynite Nov 2013 OP
You gonna count this one? zappaman Nov 2013 #1
911. JaneyVee Nov 2013 #2
I have never trashed a thread until today Cal Carpenter Nov 2013 #3
The anti-Truth flock RobertEarl Nov 2013 #4
DU has always allowed a space on the boards for this issue. n/t Bolo Boffin Nov 2013 #6
What do you think of this? RobertEarl Nov 2013 #7
Sounds like HW to me. n/t Bolo Boffin Nov 2013 #8
More from Octafish about Bush RobertEarl Nov 2013 #9
Yes, anyone familar with Octafish's posts has seen all of this many times. Bolo Boffin Nov 2013 #10
I believe the head of the CIA then was appointed by Kennedy. duffyduff Nov 2013 #18
Willingly misinformed? You mean like not even knowing that Oswald didn't own a car? DanTex Nov 2013 #19
798. nyquil_man Nov 2013 #5
Well, I told everybody it was gonna piss you off. Wilms Nov 2013 #11
Update - 31 so far brooklynite Nov 2013 #12
Vincent BUGLIOSI crushed all the PRO-ct(s) in his book, was on Tweety last week UTUSN Nov 2013 #13
As many as you want to. Why the hell should we care? scheming daemons Nov 2013 #14
Nobody cares. former9thward Nov 2013 #15
As if anyone cares. Bluenorthwest Nov 2013 #16
How could this number possibly be of significance to anyone but you? DisgustipatedinCA Nov 2013 #17
It's the 50th anniversary of an important historical event, so people are discussing it. DanTex Nov 2013 #20

Cal Carpenter

(4,959 posts)
3. I have never trashed a thread until today
Sat Nov 23, 2013, 12:37 AM
Nov 2013

And I can't remember a time when I agreed with you, either.

Strange days, indeed. As another sorta wise and assassinated fella once said.

Most peculiar, mama..

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
4. The anti-Truth flock
Sat Nov 23, 2013, 01:23 AM
Nov 2013

Curious bunch they are. For the most part the flock is willingly uninformed.

There has been reams of stuff posted which is informative about JFK, and it just goes right by them. They just ignore it! They want to remain willingly uninformed?

When not laughing at them, I reflect that they carry the genes of the ills which keeps this country from being all it can be. At least they seem to be frothing a little less and have even quit (afaict) peeing themselves over the fact that DU is allowing this very important issue a space on the boards. But then it has been shown nearly 3/4ths of us want to discuss this, so we have overcome?

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
7. What do you think of this?
Sat Nov 23, 2013, 01:38 AM
Nov 2013

Here's a bit about Bush, the CIA head and President who has been covering up all these years. Thanks to Octafish for the contents..



From "The Unauthorized Biography of George Bush"...

EXCERPT...

During the preparation of the present work, there was one historical moment
which more than any other delineated the character of George Bush. The
scene was the Nixon White House during the final days of the Watergate
debacle. White House officials, including George Bush, had spent the
morning of that Monday, August 5, 1974 absorbing the impact of Nixon's
notorious "smoking gun" tape, the recorded conversation between Nixon and
his chief of staff, H.R. Haldemann, shortly after the original Watergate
break-in, which could now no longer be withheld from the public. In that
exchange of June 23, 1972, Nixon ordered that the CIA stop the FBI from
further investigating how various sums of money found their way from Texas
and Minnesota via Mexico City to the coffers of the Committee to Re-Elect
the President (CREEP) and thence into the pockets of the "Plumbers"
arrested in the Democratic Party headquarters in the Watergate building.
These revelations were widely interpreted as establishing a "prima facie"
case of obstruction of justice against Nixon. That was fine with George,
who sincerely wanted his patron and benefactor Nixon to resign. George's
great concern was that the smoking gun tape called attention to a
money-laundering mechanism which he, together with Bill Liedtke of
Pennzoil, and Robert Mosbacher, had helped to set up at Nixon's request.
When Nixon, in the "smoking gun" tape, talked about "the Texans" and "some
Texas people," Bush, Liedtke, and Mosbacher were among the most prominent
of those referred to. The threat to George's political ambitions was great.

The White House that morning was gripped by panic. Nixon would be gone
before the end of the week. In the midst of the furor, White House
Congressional liaison William Timmons wanted to know if everyone who needed
to be informed had been briefed about the smoking gun transcript. In a
roomful of officials, some of whom were already sipping Scotch to steady
their nerves, Timmons asked Dean Burch, "Dean, does Bush know about the
transcript yet?"

"Yes," responded Burch.

"Well, what did he do?" inquired Timmons.

"He broke out into assholes and shit himself to death," replied Burch.

In this exchange, which is recorded in Woodward and Bernstein's "The Final
Days," we grasp the essential George Bush, in a crisis, and for all
seasons.

SOURCE: http://www.padrak.com/alt/BUSHBOOK_1.html


 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
9. More from Octafish about Bush
Sat Nov 23, 2013, 01:48 AM
Nov 2013

George Herbert Walker Bush also dropped a dime on an assassination suspect an hour afterward. One would think a good time to phone in a threat would be BEFORE the assassination.





TO: SAC, HOUSTON DATE: 11-22-63

FROM: SA GRAHAM W. KITCHEL

SUBJECT: UNKNOWN SUBJECT;
ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT
JOHN F. KENNEDY

At 1:45 p.m. Mr. GEORGE H. W. BUSH, President of the Zapata Off-Shore Drilling Company, Houston, Texas, residence 5525 Briar, Houston, telephonically furnished the following information to writer by long distance telephone call from Tyler, Texas.

BUSH stated that he wanted to be kept confidential but wanted to furnish hearsay that he recalled hearing in recent weeks, the day and source unknown. He stated that one JAMES PARROTT has been talking of killing the President when he comes to Houston.

BUSH stated that PARROTT is possibly a student at the University of Houston and is active in political matters in this area. He stated that he felt Mrs. FAWLEY, telephone number SU 2-5239, or ARLINE SMITH, telephone number JA 9-9194 of the Harris County Republican Party Headquarters would be able to furnish additional information regarding the identity of PARROTT.

BUSH stated that he was proceeding to Dallas, Texas, would remain in the Sheraton-Dallas Hotel and return to his residence on 11-23-63. His office telephone number is CA 2-0395.

# # #



A week later, FBI director J Edgar Hoover brings up "Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency."





Date: November 29, 1963

To: Director
Bureau of Intelligence and Research
Department of State

From: John Edgar Hoover, Director

Subject: ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY
NOVEMBER 22, 1963

Our Miami, Florida, Office on November 23, 1963, advised that the Office of Coordinator of Cuban Affairs in Miami advised that the Department of State feels some misguided anti-Castro group might capitalize on the present situation and undertake an unauthorized raid against Cuba, believing that the assassination of President John F. Kennedy might herald a change in U. S. policy, which is not true.

Our sources and informants familiar with Cuban matters in the Miami area advise that the general feeling in the anti-Castro Cuban community is one of stunned disbelief and, even among those who did not entirely agree with the President's policy concerning Cuba, the feeling is that the President's death represents a great loss not only to the U. S. but to all of Latin America. These sources know of no plans for unauthorized action against Cuba.

An informant who has furnished reliable information in the past and who is close to a small pro-Castro group in Miami has advised that these individuals are afraid that the assassination of the President may result in strong repressive measures being taken against them and, although pro-Castro in their feelings, regret the assassination.

The substance of the foregoing information was orally furnished to Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency and Captain William Edwards of the Defense Intelligence Agency on November 23, 1963, by Mr. W. T. Forsyth of this Bureau.

# # #



Something else Tom Brokaw should ask the first CIA director to rise to the top of the heap and become preznit and have a kid become pretzeldent: Why has the CIA failed to tell the FBI and the Warren Commission that it was involved in plots with the Mafia to murder Fidel Castro -- even after being ordered to stop by Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy?

Also: Why did the CIA fail to tell the FBI and the Warren Commission that it was monitoring Lee Harvey Oswald for weeks before the assassination?

Bolo Boffin

(23,796 posts)
10. Yes, anyone familar with Octafish's posts has seen all of this many times.
Sat Nov 23, 2013, 02:03 AM
Nov 2013

I thought HW was supposed to be part of the assassination plot. Why's he dropping a dime on this Parrott clown? Didn't he get the memo? After all, he helps put the B in BFEE. Nobody told him?

I fully expect that HW will be shown to have been far more in the pocket of the CIA during this time than we've known. I wouldn't be surprised to find he was up to his neck in the Bay of Pigs debacle. None of this is evidence he was involved in Kennedy's assassination.

Close to the end: these are good questions. The answer is not necessarily, "Because they put Oswald up to it." You and I would judge the likelihood of that answer differently. Neither of us has the evidence needed to convince the other ours is the more likely.

But "The CIA was so busy trying to knock off Castro that they fumbled a screaming loud threat to the President right under their noses" doesn't look too good on a resume or a history book.

 

duffyduff

(3,251 posts)
18. I believe the head of the CIA then was appointed by Kennedy.
Sun Nov 24, 2013, 11:11 AM
Nov 2013

I am sure he wanted to get rid of the president--NOT.

It's just so damned dumb for anybody to believe in that conspiracy swill these days. It only proves P.T. Barnum right.

UTUSN

(70,686 posts)
13. Vincent BUGLIOSI crushed all the PRO-ct(s) in his book, was on Tweety last week
Sun Nov 24, 2013, 09:54 AM
Nov 2013

His book shatters all 51 ct(s) and lists the 100+ things pointing-TO Oswald.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Hmm, how many Kennedy CT ...