Conservative Political Forum

General Category => Alternate Boards => Conspiracy Forum => Topic started by: Turks on July 11, 2013, 04:19:19 AM

Title: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: Turks on July 11, 2013, 04:19:19 AM
"Consider Kennedy's policies actions from the standpoint of an ardent national-security statist at the height of the Cold War. Here's how an ardent national-security statist viewed Kennedy and his administration:...."




http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/07/jacob-g-hornberger/no-military-coups-for-america/ (http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/07/jacob-g-hornberger/no-military-coups-for-america/)
Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: Shooterman on July 11, 2013, 06:18:32 AM
Quote from: Turks on July 11, 2013, 04:19:19 AM
"Consider Kennedy's policies actions from the standpoint of an ardent national-security statist at the height of the Cold War. Here's how an ardent national-security statist viewed Kennedy and his administration:...."




http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/07/jacob-g-hornberger/no-military-coups-for-america/ (http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/07/jacob-g-hornberger/no-military-coups-for-america/)

Men have been killed for much less than the Presidency.

In spite of the Warren Commission's white wash, ( Warren was not the most honorable man ) I always thought the killing was covered up. I also recall reading that Kennedy had all but declared war on the Federal Reserve, and that probably got him killed.
Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: mdgiles on August 27, 2013, 06:26:21 AM
What got Kennedy killed was his attempt to assassinate Castro. For some reason every seems to forget that Oswald defected to the Soviets, had a Russian wife, had attempted to assassinate a right wing political figure, and was a "Fair Play for Cuba" supporter. The Warren commission played all that down and made Oswald the lone gunman with a "magic" bullet, because to have looked too deeply into the assassination may have lead to WW3.
Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: Darth Fife on October 08, 2013, 09:11:01 PM
I wonder if we might not be facing a similar scenario now.

Look at it this way. If something were to happen to Obama during this budget impasse, Blacks (and probably Hispanics too) would riot in the streets of cities across the nation - especially if the shooter were white (which, of course, he would be found to be, whether or not he was the actually shooter). Joe Biden would impose Martial Law so fast it would make Boner's head spin.

Now in a state of national emergency, Boner would give Biden everything he wanted - or be accused of treason (and perhaps) be accused of complicity in the assassination/assassination attempt.

In fact, Biden might have the Justice Department actually arrest people like Ted Cruz, and Mike Lee (along with Rush Limbaugh, and Mark Levin) as co-conspirators!

This could get real bad, real fast.

-Darth
Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: quiller on October 17, 2013, 09:23:18 AM
Quote from: Shooterman on July 11, 2013, 06:18:32 AM
Men have been killed for much less than the Presidency.

In spite of the Warren Commission's white wash, ( Warren was not the most honorable man ) I always thought the killing was covered up. I also recall reading that Kennedy had all but declared war on the Federal Reserve, and that probably got him killed.

This should give you food for thought. Somebody somewhere put the fear of Christ into a bunch of toadies willing to swallow that Warren Committee report, possibly the biggest piece of fiction in political history.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/16/jfk-assassination-eyewitness-wont-be-at-50th-anniversary-ceremony/ (http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/16/jfk-assassination-eyewitness-wont-be-at-50th-anniversary-ceremony/)
Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: walkstall on October 17, 2013, 12:32:28 PM
Quote from: quiller on October 17, 2013, 09:23:18 AM
This should give you food for thought. Somebody somewhere put the fear of Christ into a bunch of toadies willing to swallow that Warren Committee report, possibly the biggest piece of fiction in political history.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/16/jfk-assassination-eyewitness-wont-be-at-50th-anniversary-ceremony/ (http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/16/jfk-assassination-eyewitness-wont-be-at-50th-anniversary-ceremony/)

I trust the Warren Committee report about as far as I trust b o's Hope & Change BS.  Just one more cover up in a long line of cover up's.
Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: bigmck on November 28, 2013, 05:56:36 PM
Back in the 1960's it seems like I recall there being files that were classified and were to be opened in 50 years.  I guess that was not the case, but aren't there still a lot of files on the shooting that remain classified?
Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: quiller on November 28, 2013, 06:10:45 PM
Quote from: bigmck on November 28, 2013, 05:56:36 PM
Back in the 1960's it seems like I recall there being files that were classified and were to be opened in 50 years.  I guess that was not the case, but aren't there still a lot of files on the shooting that remain classified?

The pink dress and a few other physical items. Probably the Xrays for Kennedy's skull. I doubt there will be a copy of NPR coverage (over the Christmas holidays) where TWO long-time pathologists testified there were signs of two bullet wounds to that same skull. Lamestream apologists gave it the same attention as the Benghazi cover-up.
Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: the outlaw mortarman on November 28, 2013, 07:07:02 PM
That wasn't a military coup. It was CIA-Mafia Connection. The military would not have assassinated him, they would have jus' deposed an' imprisoned him, butt only in event that he had become to much of a danger to the country. They also would have deposed Johnson, McCormack, Hayden, Rusk, Bobbie Kennedy, McCone an' J. Edgar Hoover an' imprisoned them until a stable government could be put in place an' free an' fair elections could be held.

In light of what is going on with the regime in Washington, this would not be a bad idea right now.

:popcorn:
Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: Mountainshield on December 01, 2013, 04:45:55 AM
Quote from: mdgiles on August 27, 2013, 06:26:21 AM
What got Kennedy killed was his attempt to assassinate Castro. For some reason every seems to forget that Oswald defected to the Soviets, had a Russian wife, had attempted to assassinate a right wing political figure, and was a "Fair Play for Cuba" supporter. The Warren commission played all that down and made Oswald the lone gunman with a "magic" bullet, because to have looked too deeply into the assassination may have lead to WW3.

Indeed, what we see is teh MSM embracing this conspiracy theory because it furthers the socialists cause if the belowed JFK was assisinated by illusionary reactionary forces of the right wing.

QuoteThe Chilean people elect a communist, Salvador Allende, in a democratic election at the height of the Cold War. U.S. officials say that this cannot stand. So, President Nixon orders the CIA to foment a massive economic crisis within the country, much like the economic crisis leading up to the military coup in Egypt. "Make the economy scream" are Nixon's exact words.

This article is ludicrous left wing bullshit, the Chilean economy collapsed as a direct result of Allende policies and failed socialist policies, read the i.e the commanding heights by Daniel Yergin.
Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: Soupnazi630 on December 08, 2013, 05:03:35 PM
Quote from: Turks on July 11, 2013, 04:19:19 AM
"Consider Kennedy's policies actions from the standpoint of an ardent national-security statist at the height of the Cold War. Here's how an ardent national-security statist viewed Kennedy and his administration:...."




http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/07/jacob-g-hornberger/no-military-coups-for-america/ (http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/07/jacob-g-hornberger/no-military-coups-for-america/)

On man even a former marine acting alone is not a coup.
None of that matters because one ex Marine ( Oswald ) getting lucky and murdering the president is not a coup
Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: Soupnazi630 on December 08, 2013, 05:20:32 PM
Quote from: mdgiles on August 27, 2013, 06:26:21 AM
What got Kennedy killed was his attempt to assassinate Castro. For some reason every seems to forget that Oswald defected to the Soviets, had a Russian wife, had attempted to assassinate a right wing political figure, and was a "Fair Play for Cuba" supporter. The Warren commission played all that down and made Oswald the lone gunman with a "magic" bullet, because to have looked too deeply into the assassination may have lead to WW3.

The actually investigated his involvement with the fair play for Cuba committee very extensively there was simply no connection between Castro and Oswald.

The Warren Commission never mentioned or described a Magic  bullet.

The bullet reffered to as " magical " was actually very ordinary and mundane. Conspiracy theorists made up the lie about the magical qualities.
Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: cpicturetaker12 on December 10, 2013, 12:21:56 PM
Quote from: Turks on July 11, 2013, 04:19:19 AM
"Consider Kennedy's policies actions from the standpoint of an ardent national-security statist at the height of the Cold War. Here's how an ardent national-security statist viewed Kennedy and his administration:...."




http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/07/jacob-g-hornberger/no-military-coups-for-america/ (http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/07/jacob-g-hornberger/no-military-coups-for-america/)

AND LET US NOT FORGET, THE MOTHER OF ALL COUPS!   IRAN--MOSSADEGH, August 1953.  The coup that TRUMAN said, no fucking way to but EISENHOWER handed to Britain 'as a gift' and set us down the path 26 years (and now 60 years) later for a foreign relations nightmare.  Thanks IKE!!  Thanks BRITISH PROTELEUM!!!  You set the course for half a decade of chaos! 
Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: cpicturetaker12 on December 10, 2013, 12:25:26 PM
Quote from: cpicturetaker12 on December 10, 2013, 12:21:56 PM
AND LET US NOT FORGET, THE MOTHER OF ALL COUPS!   IRAN--MOSSADEGH, August 1953.  The coup that TRUMAN said, no fucking way to but EISENHOWER handed to Britain 'as a gift' and set us down the path 26 years (and now 60 years) later for a foreign relations nightmare.  Thanks IKE!!  Thanks BRITISH PROTELEUM!!!  You set the course for half a decade of chaos!
Afterall, WE and Britian couldn't have a DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED leader (and by all accounts, a fair minded progressive one) tell BRITISH PETROLEUM what they could and couldn't do with the OIL THEY THOUGHT THEY HAD EVERY RIGHT TO.  WE and BRITIAN had to determine that for them!   We haven't learned a GD thing!!
Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: Soupnazi630 on December 14, 2013, 10:47:01 PM
Quote from: mdgiles on August 27, 2013, 06:26:21 AM
What got Kennedy killed was his attempt to assassinate Castro. For some reason every seems to forget that Oswald defected to the Soviets, had a Russian wife, had attempted to assassinate a right wing political figure, and was a "Fair Play for Cuba" supporter. The Warren commission played all that down and made Oswald the lone gunman with a "magic" bullet, because to have looked too deeply into the assassination may have lead to WW3.

The warren Commission actually covered all of Oswalds activities in extraordinary detail they did not down play any of it.

Nor did they " make " him alone gunman. They followed the evidence which led to the conclusion that he was the lone gunman and in fact no other credible evidence contradicts this.

THe Warren Commission never stated that there was a magic bullet nor did they describe any bullet which performed in a fashion which was out of the ordinary. The bullet was mundane and ordinary consistent with having struck two men. It was not pristine nor did it zig zag through the air or curve through the air or any other such nonsense.

The claim that the WC tried to sell a magic bullet idea is dreamed and repeated by legions of conspiracy theorists who trust that few will bother to check and see if the commission made such claims. If one reads the report one will find such a description conspicuous in its absence.
Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: Soupnazi630 on December 14, 2013, 10:48:04 PM
Quote from: quiller on October 17, 2013, 09:23:18 AM
This should give you food for thought. Somebody somewhere put the fear of Christ into a bunch of toadies willing to swallow that Warren Committee report, possibly the biggest piece of fiction in political history.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/16/jfk-assassination-eyewitness-wont-be-at-50th-anniversary-ceremony/ (http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/16/jfk-assassination-eyewitness-wont-be-at-50th-anniversary-ceremony/)

Specifically what makes it fiction?
Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: quiller on December 15, 2013, 12:07:51 AM
Quote from: Soupnazi630 on December 14, 2013, 10:48:04 PM
Specifically what makes it fiction?
You're not convincing me it wasn't.

Continue touting the party line, comrade. It was a lie from cover to cover, and Gerald Ford got to be Vice President for helping accomplish that.
Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: Soupnazi630 on December 15, 2013, 07:57:05 AM
Quote from: quiller on December 15, 2013, 12:07:51 AM
You're not convincing me it wasn't.

Continue touting the party line, comrade. It was a lie from cover to cover, and Gerald Ford got to be Vice President for helping accomplish that.

I attempted to convince you of nothing I asked a question.

Specifically what makes it fiction.

Unlike you I am skeptical and want to be convinced which is why I asked.

I have no problem with your faith in what cannot be proven but I am curious what specifics of the report you can point to as fiction
Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: quiller on December 15, 2013, 08:34:33 AM
Quote from: Soupnazi630 on December 15, 2013, 07:57:05 AM
I attempted to convince you of nothing I asked a question.

Specifically what makes it fiction.

Unlike you I am skeptical and want to be convinced which is why I asked.

I have no problem with your faith in what cannot be proven but I am curious what specifics of the report you can point to as fiction

If you have not noticed how Warren got to the Supremes and Ford to the WH, then I doubt any hints may sway you. Oswald's radio broadcasts in Miami were sorely glossed-over by that same sorry report. They downplayed his socialism to a laughable degree. End of discussion. It was rigged by the beneficiary, LBJ.
Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: Soupnazi630 on December 15, 2013, 10:45:04 AM
Quote from: quiller on December 15, 2013, 08:34:33 AM
If you have not noticed how Warren got to the Supremes and Ford to the WH, then I doubt any hints may sway you. Oswald's radio broadcasts in Miami were sorely glossed-over by that same sorry report. They downplayed his socialism to a laughable degree. End of discussion. It was rigged by the beneficiary, LBJ.

Warren was appointed to the Supreme Court by Ike not by LBJ.

One has nothing to do with the other and although many of Warren's court decision were terrible none of that addresses the truth and facts of the Warren Commission report which you also ignore and have never bothered to read.

Ford got to the white house because Nixon resigned and once again this has nothing whatsoever to do with the Warren COmmission or Kennedy. Yes I know you SPECULATE that there was a connection but I asked for specifics.

Oswald never made a radio broadcast in Miami and his communist background was exhaustiely detailed by the Warren commission report which once again you never read.

This is not the end of the discussion since you may of course CLAIM anything you wish about the report but you have no clue whatsoever what is in the report and you were asked for specifics which you cannot do.

The Warren COmmission and it's report is accurate correct ( not perfect ) and supported by evidence. Every claim you have made about it thus far is a falserhood which you cannot support with any evidence whatsoever.

So one more time with specifics what makes it fiction?
Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: quiller on December 15, 2013, 12:27:03 PM
Well, since youi have all the answers, I'll leave you to "THE" conclusuion.
Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: Soupnazi630 on December 15, 2013, 01:20:51 PM
Quote from: quiller on December 15, 2013, 12:27:03 PM
Well, since youi have all the answers, I'll leave you to "THE" conclusuion.

So you admit it was correct and not fiction?
Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: quiller on December 16, 2013, 07:32:01 AM
What, democrats lie to the American public? Who'da thunk it?.....

One of the most hard-hitting objective reporters in the business, Jake Tapper, says....

QuoteThe commission's final conclusion was that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone, but many respected experts looking back at the report find it flawed. You don't have to be an "X-Files" conspiracy theorist to think that the truth is out there.

"My big sort of takeaway, is just how much of this story has never been told, how much evidence about the assassination has been destroyed over the years or covered up, and I make efforts to find as much of that evidence as I can," said author Philip Shenon, who has spent the last five years picking up where the commission left off.

(. . . ) So many questions remain.

"There is an astonishing memo that J. Edgar Hoover writes to the Warren Commission in June 1964, right in the middle of the Warren Commission investigation, in which he reveals that the FBI has learned that several weeks before the assassination, Oswald in Mexico City, openly declared that he was going to kill President Kennedy," said Shenon. "That memo is a big debate among the Warren Commission staff members because they never saw it."

( . . . ) In 1976, post-Watergate, Congress reinvestigated the Kennedy assassination, concluding that, "The Warren Commission performed with varying degrees of competency," and that the Warren Commission "failed to investigate adequately the possibility of a conspiracy to assassinate the President."

"Scientific acoustical evidence establishes a high probability that two gunmen fired" at JFK, "the committee believes ... that President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy."

The 1976 commission found that the Warren report, "arrived at its conclusions in good faith," but the FBI failed to investigate any conspiracy, and the CIA was "deficient in its collection and sharing of information."

http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/11/20/who-killed-jfk-book-goes-behind-the-scenes-of-warren-commission/ (http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/11/20/who-killed-jfk-book-goes-behind-the-scenes-of-warren-commission/)

Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: taxed on December 16, 2013, 11:21:47 AM
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F2.bp.blogspot.com%2F-Imf3iDqEfNc%2FThR9KnmpdPI%2FAAAAAAAAF6U%2FY-fRA23CCfk%2Fs400%2F425782501_2d31e2a829.jpg&hash=016e292df511d3e0678292059f90ee4e04474894)
Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: Soupnazi630 on December 16, 2013, 12:30:10 PM
Quote from: quiller on December 16, 2013, 07:32:01 AM
What, democrats lie to the American public? Who'da thunk it?.....

One of the most hard-hitting objective reporters in the business, Jake Tapper, says....

http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/11/20/who-killed-jfk-book-goes-behind-the-scenes-of-warren-commission/ (http://thelead.blogs.cnn.com/2013/11/20/who-killed-jfk-book-goes-behind-the-scenes-of-warren-commission/)

No one denies that both parties have lied that is the nature of politics.

The issue at hand is whether the Warren commission lied and no evidence has been presented in your post suggesting that it had.

The  House Select Comittee on assasination had a conclusion of a probable conspiracy this is true.

But what is ignored is that this conclusion was based on one and only one piece of evidence which has been proven false.

The evidence was a recording from the Dallas Police department of sounds picked up by a motorcycle officers shoulder mic which was stuck in the push to talk position.

The initial analysis which the HSCA relied on was that it recorded the sounds of more than three shots. Unfortunately the sound of gunshots is no where to be found on the recording and this analysis was done on static which is on the recording. The acoustic experts presenting the recording referred to changes in the volume of static gunfire. It was only well after the committee disbanded that it was proven that the recording was actually of sounds picked up at Parkland memorial hospital well after the shooting. The officer escorted the motorcade to the hospital and only then keyed his microphone and it stuck. On the recording one can hear bells from a church next to the hospital as well as the hospital PA system paging a doctor.

Since this was the only evidence of a probable conspiracy the conclusion of such a probability is discredited and the HSCA was wrong.

The rest of the evidence studied by the HSCA supports the Warren Commission.

Despite peoples hatred of the Warren Commission report we still have anyone presenting any evidence that they lied or were wrong.
Title: Re: No Military Coups for America? What About November 1963?
Post by: quiller on December 17, 2013, 05:36:36 AM
Quote from: taxed on December 16, 2013, 11:21:47 AM
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F2.bp.blogspot.com%2F-Imf3iDqEfNc%2FThR9KnmpdPI%2FAAAAAAAAF6U%2FY-fRA23CCfk%2Fs400%2F425782501_2d31e2a829.jpg&hash=016e292df511d3e0678292059f90ee4e04474894)

I always wondered how they were able to round up a convenient federal judge to administer the oath of office to a VP who was supposed to be anywhere else...for safety reasons.