Trump’s lame conspiracy theories about practically everything

NPR:

Donald Trump’s ceaseless efforts to inject unsubstantiated plots into the American political debate.

 

95 comments

  1. Jordan says:

    While I am no fan of the Trumpster, I think it’s about time that people recognize the “alleged” issues regarding Vince Foster, Mena Arkansas, Barry Seal, the Clinton-Bush connections, and yes, the Rafael Cruz “thing” among others.

    Have we, if not someone else, not already white-washed and ignored far too many plausible avenues of inquiry and possible alternate reasons and explanations for the behind the scene goings-on in the U.S. and elsewhere…?

    Face it, treating Trump’s suspicions as though they are the ramblings of a conspiracy theorist smacks of the same attitude many hold in regards to those trying to get at the heart of the JFK riddle…

    • I have to agree with Jordan on this. Especially on the topics of, Vince Foster, Mena Arkansas, Barry Seal, the Clinton-Bush connections.
      \\][//

      • Tom S. says:

        Fortunately, determination is not reached by public opinion or feeling. Are you saying Ken Starr was “in” on a cover up,
        despite record expenditure in money and time in a vindictive, highly partisan “investigation”. Did Scaife reward Starr with
        a presidency position at Pepperdine Law in Malibu just to throw the more gullible among us, off track?

        Starr Probe Reaffirms Foster Killed Himself
        http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/whitewater/stories/wwtr971011.htm
        The Washington Post
        Oct 11, 1997 – Read the full text of Starr’s report on Vincent W. Foster’s death. … office of Whitewater independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr has reaffirmed previous … of the United States somehow had complicity in Vince’s death,” she said.

        https://www.google.com/search?site=&source=hp&q=pepperdine+law+scaife+starr&oq=pepperdine+law+scaife+starr&gs_l=hp.3…1483.11404.0.12104.28.28.0.0.0.0.205.2242.26j1j1.28.0….0…1c.1.64.hp..0.19.1583.0..0j5j35i39j0i46i67j46i67j0i67j0i131j0i20j0i22i30j33i21.uKyY7JHDTys
        Starr Again Named Dean of Pepperdine Law School
        http://www.metnews.com/articles/2004/star040604.htm
        Apr 6, 2004 – Starr Again Named Dean of Pepperdine Law School … Mellon Scaife, Starr withdrew his acceptance of both Pepperdine jobs in April of 1998.
        Starr Declines Pepperdine Because of Investigation – Washington Post
        http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/…/starr041798.htmThe Washington Post
        Apr 17, 1998 – Starr said that Scaife had nothing to do with the Pepperdine offer. … half of the dual post offered him — the deanship of Pepperdine’s law school.

        I’m weary from asking….who do you expect your readership is? Is it well informed, in your mind’s eye? If your
        readership is well informed, how long do you expect to hold their attention, given what you offer them? Do you expect
        you have to earn their attention through what you write? I can only share my perspective, the only one I know how to have.
        It is oriented to evidence that stands up under scrutiny, with a pinch or two of common sense.

        My reply, Willy, is a general one. I have to read every comment. Some of the comments I read seem unreasonable, as many things as possible considered.

        • “Who do you expect your readership is? Is it well informed, in your mind’s eye? If your
          readership is well informed, how long do you expect to hold their attention…”~Tom

          I do expect my readership to be the well informed, and on these issues of Vince Foster, Mena Arkansas, Barry Seal, the Clinton-Bush connections; I think the better informed would understand and agree with what I and Jordan have expressed.
          \\][//

          • Ronnie Wayne says:

            Starr sure as hell should have been fired before or at least with Briles. Art Briles would have done what ever the University told him regarding disciplining players or kicking them off the team. He knows how to find more players. IF the University supported investigation and punishment he would have done what was necessary.
            The Baylor Law School handled dealing with the legal aspects, overseen by Starr.
            As was Briles.
            He’s a scapegoat for Starr.

  2. lysias says:

    It certainly looks very much as if Vince Foster’s body was moved from the White House grounds to Fort Marcy Park. If you’re involved in corrupting the evidence after a possible murder, doesn’t that make you into a suspect?

    Isn’t that the very reason for suspecting LBJ was involved in the assassination conspiracy?

    • Jordan says:

      Yeah…something about the body being moved just far enough to lie within a different jurisdition….I really hate it when that happens..!

  3. Reading some of these comments, from people who usually sound like leftists, I get the idea Trump may have considerable support from the people who post here.

    • Tom S. says:

      Reading some of these comments, from people who usually sound like leftists, I get the idea Trump may have considerable support from the people who post here.

      In your dreams, maybe. It is fascinating that so much money has been spent by so few to inject opinions and beliefs you
      just happen to march in lockstep with, according to what is presented in some of your comments. If I frequently repeated messages created, distributed, and reinforced through expenditures (“donations” to “think” tanks, political contributions by a few wealthy individuals, lobbying and advertising of major fossil fuel “interests,”) I would hope I’d have the self awareness to stop commenting. I hear ordinary people in growing numbers describing, “democrat” party or “democrat” leader.
      Not that long ago, before the right began to develop it’s own language (who paid for that to develop?) the description was, democratic party, democratic convention, etc. …If it is nothing, why has the right trained itself to speak it that way?

      So much is ingrained in you inside the bubble you’ve encased yourself in, you probably actually believe you were the Marquette U. speech rights champion and so many of your peers are woefully misguided. You seem an unauthentic variation
      of Amish separateness.

      http://fair.org/extra/who-pays-for-think-tanks/
      July 1, 2013
      Who Pays for Think Tanks?
      Corporate and foundation money often comes with an agenda

      Almost two-thirds of the think tanks studied (16 out of 25) took money from at least one oil company. Thirteen—more than half—were funded by ExxonMobil, ….; the Koch brothers contributed to seven….

      http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/11/us/politics/2016-presidential-election-super-pac-donors.html?_r=0
      Just 158 families have provided nearly half of the early money for efforts to capture…
      Oct. 10, 2015
      ….the two groups contributed well over half the money in the presidential election — the vast majority of it supporting Republicans…..

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness#1990s
      …In May 1991,…., then U.S. President George H.W. Bush used the term in his speech: “The notion of political correctness has ignited controversy across the land. And although the movement arises from the laudable desire to sweep away the debris of racism and sexism and hatred, it replaces old prejudice with new ones. It declares certain topics off-limits, certain expression off-limits, even certain gestures off-limits.”[46][47][48]

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrat_Party_(epithet)#Modern_usage
      …..
      After 1991, its use as a pejorative phrase became widespread amongst conservatives in the US.[5] ….

      Following his inauguration in 2001, President George W. Bush often used the noun-as-adjective when referring to the opposition party.[21] Likewise, it has been used by …other Republicans. In 2006, Ruth Marcus, a columnist for The Washington Post, noted that “[t]he derisive use of ‘Democrat’ in this way was a Bush staple during the recent campaign”, and she chastised Bush, alleging he was being intentionally offensive.[6] Marcus went on to say the argument about the term was “trivial, sticks-and-stones […] linguistic bickering”.[6]

      Bush spoke of the “Democrat majority” in his 2007 State of the Union Address.[26]….

      • If I frequently repeated messages created, distributed, and reinforced through expenditures (“donations” to “think” tanks, political contributions by a few wealthy individuals, lobbying and advertising of major fossil fuel “interests,”) I would hope I’d have the self awareness to stop commenting.

        You mean I should not post things that in your mind you associate with people you don’t like.

        Get this, Tom. I don’t care whom you like and don’t like. You are just a scruffy leftist.

        And I stand by my comment that it’s odd if people who are so keen on conspiracy theories condemn Trump for thinking like they do.

        • Couching the threat a Trump presidency as simply a partisan issue misses the point that he is a declared enemy of our constitution and displays no personal allegiance to any party – except his own.

          “ . . . Columnists and magazines that a month ago were saying #NeverTrump are now vibrating with the frisson of his audacity, fawning over him or at least thrilling to his rising poll numbers and telling one another, “We can control him.”

          No, you can’t. One can argue about whether to call him a fascist or an authoritarian populist or a grotesque joke made in a nightmare shared between Philip K. Dick and Tom Wolfe, but under any label Trump is a declared enemy of the liberal constitutional order of the United States—the order that has made it, in fact, the great and plural country that it already is. He announces his enmity to America by word and action every day. It is articulated in his insistence on the rightness of torture and the acceptable murder of noncombatants. It is self-evident in the threats he makes daily to destroy his political enemies, made only worse by the frivolity and transience of the tone of those threats. He makes his enmity to American values clear when he suggests that the Presidency holds absolute power, through which he will be able to end opposition—whether by questioning the ownership of newspapers or talking about changing libel laws or threatening to take away F.C.C. licenses. To say “Well, he would not really have the power to accomplish that” is to misunderstand the nature of thin-skinned authoritarians in power. They do not arrive in office and discover, as constitutionalists do, that their capabilities are more limited than they imagined. They arrive, and then make their power as large as they can.

          And Trump announces his enmity in the choice of his companions. The Murdoch media conglomerate has been ordered to acquiesce; it’s no surprise that it has. But Trump’s other fellow-travellers include Roger Stone, the Republican political operative and dirty-tricks maven, while his venues have included the broadcasts of Alex Jones, a ranting conspiracy theorist who believes in a Globalist plot wherein “an alien force not of this world is attacking humanity”—not to mention Jones’s marketing of the theory that Michelle Obama is a transvestite who murdered Joan Rivers. These are not harmless oddballs Trump is flirting with. This is not the lunatic fringe. These are the lunatics.” – Adam Gopnik

          http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-dangerous-acceptance-of-donald-trump

    • “Reading some of these comments, from people who usually sound like leftists”~John McAdams

      What does that term mean to you McAdams? “Leftist”?

      It seems that a professor of political science would have the sophistication to grasp the Hegelian Dialectic, and the false paradigm of Left & Right it generates. It is all “political language” as George Orwell noted, ‘political language is nothing but hot air.’
      \\][//

      • Tom S. says:

        Part I of II

        Willy, have you observed appreciable differences, at all? An example, the Voting Rights Act was passed in 1964. Compare the impact on the status quo with the rash of photo I.D. voting “requirements” passed almost exclusively in republican party dominant state governments over the last six years. The 1964 legislation seems intended to restrain controlling interests. Who is intended to be restrained by the photo I.D. legislation?

        I find your repetition related to this, off putting. I see a clear distinction and just because many of our countrymen are
        lost, resulting in this sorry condition compared to our European friends, do we simply dismiss what sane politics could
        do for the benefit of our society, dare I say it, to define and support societal purpose?

        http://georgiapoliticalreview.com/humane-executions-the-paradox-of-american-capital-punishment/
        ………..
        In Norway, there is no death penalty, or even life sentences. Prisons like Halden indicate a real commitment to reducing recidivism and improving inmates’ futures on the outside. Some argue it works. Norway boasts one of the lowest recidivism rates in the world­, 20 percent, while America’s hovers around 68 percent.

        http://www.creditcards.com/credit-card-news/vacation-debt-poll.php
        May 18, 2016
        When it comes to their summer vacations this year, Americans aren’t planning to break the bank, according to a new CreditCards.com poll. In fact, they’re feeling downright frugal. More than half of those suveyed – 54 percent – said they aren’t planning to take a summer vacation at all.

        Are you dismissive of, or failing to consider a long, predictable pattern of targeting the least powerful and wealthy, targets with the least influence?

        Reagan’s Stories Don’t Always Check Out . – Google News
        https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=reagan+every+stop+%22woman+in+chicago%22
        …referred to her at nearly ‘every stop, using her as part of his “citizens press conference” … there’s a woman in Chicago,” Reagan said last week to am audience at …

        Date: Friday, February 13, 1976 Paper: Boston Herald (Boston, Massachusetts) Page: 9

        http://www.salon.com/2009/09/17/acorn_hysteria/
        Thursday, Sep 17, 2009 11:18 AM EST
        The distracting benefits of ACORN hysteria
        Wall Street, defense contractors and the insurance industry v. the poor and dispossessed
        Glenn Greenwald
        ….So with this massive pillaging of America’s economic security and the control of American government by its richest and most powerful factions growing by the day, to whom is America’s intense economic anxiety being directed? To a non-profit group that devotes itself to providing minute benefits to people who live under America’s poverty line, and which is so powerless in Washington that virtually the entire U.S. Senate just voted to cut off its funding
        (see http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=1&vote=00275 )
        at the first sign of real controversy — could anyone imagine that happening to a key player in the banking or defense industry?

        cont….

        • Tom S. says:

          Part II of II

          Apparently, the problem for middle-class and lower-middle-class Americans is not
          that their taxpayer dollars are going to prop up billionaires, oligarchs and their corrupt industries. It’s that America’s impoverished — a group that is growing rapidly — is getting too much, has too much power and too little accountability. Anonymous Liberal has a superb post on the manipulative inanity of the Fox-generated ACORN ”scandal” (h/t D-day):

          Let’s take a step back and consider just what ACORN is. It is a non-profit organization whose mission is to empower and improve the lives of poor people. As with many other organizations, ACORN has a number of legally distinct parts, each of which has different sources of funding and engages in different kinds of activities (ACORN’s conservative enemies routinely conflate these various parts to imply that ACORN is using federal money for improper political purposes). …

          http://www.salon.com/2009/09/23/grayson_2/
          …the bill passed by both the Senate and House to de-fund ACORN… literally compels the de-funding.. of,… “has filed a fraudulent form with any Federal or State regulatory agency.” By definition, that includes virtually every large defense contractor, which — unlike ACORN — has actually been found guilty of fraud.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Community_Organizations_for_Reform_Now#Defund_ACORN_Act
          …………
          In response to an inquiry from a Housing and Urban Development Department lawyer, David Barron, the acting assistant attorney general for the Office of Legal Counsel, wrote a five-page memorandum concluding that the law does not prohibit the government from paying ACORN for services already performed.[104] On December 11, U.S. District Judge Nina Gershon issued a preliminary injunction blocking the government from enforcing its temporary spending ban, a week before it was set to expire.[108] The Government Accountability Office (GAO) opened an investigation of ACORN in December 2009.[109] In June 2010, the GAO released a preliminary report stating the investigation has found no sign the group or related organizations mishandled the $40 million in federal money they received from nine federal agencies.[110]

          On August 13, 2010 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed Judge Gershon’s decision.[111] The appeals court cited a study finding that only 10% of ACORN’s funding came from federal sources, and stated, “We doubt that the direct consequences of the appropriations laws temporarily precluding ACORN from federal funds were so disproportionately severe or so inappropriate as to constitute punishment.”[111] The Center for Constitutional Rights, which had argued the case on ACORN’s behalf, was considering a request for a rehearing by more judges of the 2nd Circuit.[111]…

          http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7422-2004Oct28.html
          GOP Challenging Voter Registrations
          Civil Rights Groups Accuse Republicans Of Trying to Disenfranchise Minorities
          By Jo Becker
          Washington Post Staff Writer
          Friday, October 29, 2004; Page A05

          ….The Republican challenges in Ohio, Wisconsin and other battleground states prompted civil rights and labor unions to sue in U.S. District Court in Newark, saying the GOP is violating a consent decree, issued in the 1980s by Judge Dickinson R. Debevoise and still in effect, that prevents the Republicans from starting “ballot security” programs to prevent voter fraud that target minorities….

          • You understand that all the political stuff you post gives the impression that buffs see everything in terms of politics, right?

            That to buffs the issue is not who is guilty and who is innocent, but whom they like and whom they dislike on the basis of politics, right?

          • Photon says:

            Dr. McAdams, you have just stated my principal conclusion in regards to Conspiracy Theory- that the physical evidence does not matter and never has. For left-wingers it is self-evident that right wing elements including the CIA had to have killed JFK-ergo the tangents that folks like DiEugenio and Douglass take .
            For right wingers it is the paranoid view of the government and its influence controlling everything.
            For both the evidence and unfortunately the truth often gets in the way.

          • “That to buffs the issue is not who is guilty and who is innocent, but whom they like and whom they dislike on the basis of politics, right?” ~McAdams

            What preposterous nonsense you come up with “professor”, utterly ludicrous BS.

            The assertion that “buffs” do not address the evidence is proven to be your own biased hogwash by reading these very threads.
            \\][//

    • “I get the idea Trump may have considerable support from the people who post here.”

      As one who spends a good deal of time and energy on this site, I go on record – unequivocally – that I am exerting all of my efforts as a voter in spite of being limited by living pay check to pay check to oppose Donald Trump.

      Jeff Morley might want to rethink – on principal alone – the possibility he is providing a venue for the Trump candidacy, veiled as it is as evidenced in John McAdams’ comments.

    • Ramon F Herrera says:

      [John McAdams:] “I get the idea [that] Trump may have considerable support from the people who post here.”
      ===================

      Professor McAdams, a model of political ideology vs. position in the JFK case has been proposed.

      http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/10/the-georgetown-set-112125 (Click in “Show Comments”)

      You just stated that the majority of active CTs fall in group No. 4, when it has been traditionally believed (by themselves) that they fall in group No. 1.

      Can you explain your reasoning? Can anybody out there raise your hands if you are a CT Trump voter?

      • Ramon F Herrera says:

        Furthermore, professor: Since per his own admission Mr. Trump has historically been your fellow member of group No. 3:

        http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/10/the-georgetown-set-112125

        [Click on “Show Comments”]

        Why would his followers be members of No. 4?

        • I would say Trump is most like your Group 4.

          But that makes no sense since he’s not really a conservative.

          He’s more a populist/nationalist. And indeed that is fertile soil for conspiracy theorizing.

          And in fact, those folks are close to Bernie Sanders in many ways, in that they think they are being screwed over by big interests, and oppose free trade.

          • Tom S. says:

            He’s more a populist/nationalist. And indeed that is fertile soil for conspiracy theorizing.

            http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2016/05/trump-and-1930s
            ……….
            All these movements had a charismatic leader at their head. None had a coherent set of ideas. Early fascisms had more in common with socialism. Those movements that survived to form dictatorial governments embraced a corporatist sort of capitalism, and set about killing left-wingers. These fascist movements were propelled by the young; Trumpismo, by contrast, has more appeal to the elderly. Perhaps because of this they looked to the future and venerated modernity, whereas Mr Trump often seems to be trying to bring back the 1950s.

            What does have a familiarly thirties ring to it is the combination of elite-rot and discredited ideas that Mr Trump feeds on….

            It is being argued with increasing frequency, that Trump looks like a fascist, quacks like a fascist…right down to the practice of privatizing the profits and socializing the losses. (see https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&tbm=bks&q=gaetano+salvemini+%22profit+is+private*%22&oq=gaetano+salvemini+%22profit+is+private*%22&gs_l=serp.12…3675.3675.0.5593.1.1.0.0.0.0.60.60.1.1.0….0…1c.1.64.serp..0.0.0.q_Iq4u2K3q0 )

            As a P.S., I’m sure you’re aware of his positioning on the political spectrum, but you deflect….perhaps too much? And….which of the two major U.S. parties is consolidating in support of the Trump presidential candidacy?
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

          • As a P.S., I’m sure you’re aware of his positioning on the political spectrum, but you deflect….perhaps too much? And….which of the two major U.S. parties is consolidating in support of the Trump presidential candidacy?

            Of course, the Republicans are slowly and grudgingly coming to the support of Trump, since he is now the alternative to Hillary.

            And I’m sure you know that Hillary is highly unpopular, even among Democrats. Having Bernie in the race has delayed Democrats rallying around her, but that will eventually happen. Hillary will be the alternative to Trump, after all.

            So this election will turn on the question: whom do you hate less?

          • Tom S. says:

            So this election will turn on the question: whom do you hate less?

            In 2004, some unserious internet voice pointed out that Dana Milbank, a member of Skull and Bones aka the Russell Trust, 64 High St. New Haven, CT was the Washington Post political reporter assigned to “cover” the campaigns of both major party presidential candidates, themselves both Bonesmen “tapped” two years apart. Skull and Bones traditionally selects only fifteen new members, all Yale University undergraduates nearing completion of their third year academic studies.

            In that particular campaign, I can understand the merit of your question and your qualification to raise it. I was comfortable with my own reaction to that 2004 “competition” and the Post’s selection of the reporter to inform us of it.

            Owing to my slightly diluted pedigree, mostly white anglo-saxon protestant male, I believe in all fairness that I could not react to the choices of Obama or Ms. Clinton with the disdain I developed while appraising the choices of Bush or Kerry.

            I watched a brief clip of an interview of Sen. Barbara Boxer on “scruffy leftist” media last night, discussing her new book. She was
            describing why she believed it was worth being “in the room,” despite all of the indignities she described experiencing in the book, resulting from her 25 years as an elected representative in one or the other federal houses of congress.

            She said if she had not had the access and the input being “in the room” has given her the opportunity to have, it was likely that the decisions made related to the business of the congress would have been left entirely under the influence of white males and the legislation and other influences they produced would not have been representative of the American people.

            Do not assume you know what is best or that you have all of the answers. Trump is already well represented in government and in society.
            So are Milbank, Bush, Kerry, and the Russell Trust.

          • Ramon F Herrera says:

            [McAdams:]

            “those folks are close to Bernie Sanders in many ways, in that they think they are being screwed over by big interests, and oppose free trade.”
            =====================

            Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. has endorsed Senator Sanders:

            https://www.facebook.com/MichiganForBernie/posts/960175574025378

            but …

            http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/269956-vicki-kennedy-endorses-clinton

            After 1963, RFK Sr. became a leftie, compared with JFK who was pro-business, and therefore Free Trade.

            If JFK and RFK were alive (but separate, one alive, the other dead), the older brother would probably endorse Mrs. Clinton and Bobby would endorse Senator Sanders.

            It is my contention that most folks feeling the Bern fall in category No. 1:

            http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/10/the-georgetown-set-112125
            [Click on “Show Comments”]

          • theNewDanger says:

            The “Free trade” that is opposed is no more free than the “Federal Reserve” is federal. “Free trade” is a perversion of nomenclature similar to how the media in the MIMAC calls its edu-indoctrinators, 5-star mercenaries, and elected fundraisers the “leadership”, but who are really only a syndicated dictatorship.

          • theNewDanger says:

            John McAdams

            June 1, 2016 at 12:57 am

            I would say Trump is most like your Group 4.

            But that makes no sense since he’s not really a conservative.

            He’s more a populist/nationalist. And indeed that is fertile soil for conspiracy theorizing.

            And in fact, those folks are close to Bernie Sanders in many ways, in that they think they are being screwed over by big interests, and oppose free trade.

            The “Free trade” that is opposed is no more free than the “Federal Reserve” is federal. “Free trade” is a perversion of nomenclature similar to how the media in the MIMAC calls its edu-indoctrinators, 5-star mercenaries, and elected fundraisers the “leadership”, but who are really only a syndicated dictatorship.

          • Owing to my slightly diluted pedigree, mostly white anglo-saxon protestant male, I believe in all fairness that I could not react to the choices of Obama or Ms. Clinton with the disdain I developed while appraising the choices of Bush or Kerry.

            What you posted is racist and sexist.

            You have just as much right to pass judgment on a black or female politician as a black person or female has to pass judgment on a white male politician.

          • Tom S. says:

            What you posted is racist and sexist.

            You have just as much right to pass judgment on a black or female politician as a black person or female has to pass judgment on a white male politician.

            I guess you only read the first half of my reply. I guess I’m trying to believe the world does not revolve around me, despite all of the advantages I’ve enjoyed resulting from an accident of birth. I try to walk a mile in other Americans’ shoes, not as often as I probably should, but enough to know to avoid writing what you’ve just presented.

            I want to be the farthest thing I can be from the stereotypical Trump voter, a white, middle aged or older American male who is feeling sorry for himself because “the other,” the Kenyan, that woman, those Mexicans seem to be horning in on his
            “deal”. I can go into a store to shop or walk up to a cop with no concern of presumption. I have no control over that privilege, but I do think about what it must be like to have to factor such concerns before I make any choice in public,
            in the world.

          • I want to be the farthest thing I can be from the stereotypical Trump voter, a white, middle aged or older American male who is feeling sorry for himself because “the other,” the Kenyan, that woman, those Mexicans seem to be horning in on his “deal”.

            I’m always amused when politically correct leftists use the phrase “the other,” since they have really vicious prejudices against people they view as “the other.”

            “White, middle aged or older American male.”

          • Tom S. says:

            I’m always amused when politically correct leftists use the phrase “the other,” since they have really vicious prejudices against people they view as “the other.”

            “White, middle aged or older American male.”

            Are you saying it is “vicious prejudice” to react to some of my countrymen who are of similar race and approximate age (I am physically indistinguishable from many of them) as if they are ridiculous, pathetic, obnoxious, intolerant, or ignorant? Please inform me of the politically incorrect reaction to their shameful ideology and attitude.

          • J.D. says:

            Ramon, I have to disagree with the idea that JFK was “pro-business” in the sense that Hillary Clinton is. JFK was not advocating for the overthrow of capitalism, but he was far more economically progressive than he’s often been portrayed. Donald Gibson’s book “Battling Wall Street” presents a good argument that JFK was basically a Keynesian, but one who was also determined to build up American industry and who was opposed to the schemes of Wall Street. His actions during the steel crisis are probably the single most dramatic confrontation between a president and big business in American history.

          • I’m always amused when politically correct leftists use the phrase “the other,” since they have really vicious prejudices against people they view as “the other.” “White, middle aged or older American male.” — Prof. McAdams

            As a political scientist at a leading Roman Catholic university, it’s amusing that you fail to grasp what TomS is acknowledging, that he knows he has been privileged throughout his life by the simple fact of his birth as a white and male in these our United States of America. Ask a white female, Anglo Saxon or other, how things have been for them; more severe test, ask a descendant of a slave, and more contemporaneously, ask a person born with a gender disposition that offends your sensibilities, or ask a Latino, or an Asian, or God Forbid someone of the Muslim faith what it’s been like to navigate the world you white males in the United States have created.

            As a child of staunch Methodist Freemasons in the Texas Panhandle and an adult convert to Catholicism – confirmed in Daniel O’Connell’s “St. Teresa’s Church on Clarendon Street”, Dublin, Ireland – I have been asking myself for the last four years, having encountered you on this JFK site, how in the name of Holy God have I ended up in the same corral with you? Maybe we should both rethink our allegiances, but I’m certain we’re not reading from the same ORIGINAL TEXT?

          • Ask a white female, Anglo Saxon or other, how things have been for them;

            Only a small minority of women (20-30%) call themselves feminists.

            Most women don’t have a gender grudge. They identify with their husbands, family, ethnic group, religion, etc.

            Were you aware that women are as likely as men to say that abortion should be illegal?

            more severe test, ask a descendant of a slave,

            Some blacks have a racial chip on their shoulder, but certainly not all.

            For example, a majority of black people prefer “all lives matter” to “black lives matter.”

            http://mu-warrior.blogspot.com/2015/08/black-people-prefer-all-lives-matter-to.html

            and more contemporaneously, ask a person born with a gender disposition that offends your sensibilities, or ask a Latino, or an Asian,

            Asians have done better than European whites in the U.S. in terms of income and education. They are actually victims of affirmative action in college admissions.

            http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/asianamericans-graphics/

            or God Forbid someone of the Muslim faith what it’s been like to navigate the world you white males in the United States have created.

            Some data you should know about:

            http://www.people-press.org/2011/08/30/a-portrait-of-muslim-americans/

            About 2/3 of American Muslims say that life is better for Muslims in the U.S. than in most Muslim countries.

            Only 16% say the U.S. is unfriendly toward them.

            You need to drop the bigotry toward white males.

          • Are you saying it is “vicious prejudice” to react to some of my countrymen who are of similar race and approximate age (I am physically indistinguishable from many of them) as if they are ridiculous, pathetic, obnoxious, intolerant, or ignorant? Please inform me of the politically incorrect reaction to their shameful ideology and attitude.

            It’s one thing to disagree with people’s attitudes, and other to judge them based on race and gender.

            And as for “shameful ideology and attitude:” I have to same right to judge you and Leslie on your ideology and attitudes that you have to judge those you view as “the other.”

            Do you think you get to call others “ridiculous, pathetic, obnoxious, intolerant, or ignorant” while being exempt from such a judgment being passed on you?

          • ‘Most women don’t have a gender grudge. They identify with their husbands, family, ethnic group, religion, etc.’ — John McAdams

            Gender grudge, John? Seems to me you are the one frantically arguing your dominant white male grudge instead of engaging in a rational conversation about what it is like to be any one but “YOU”.

            As female, I have always identified as a sentient being, sometimes I’m married, sometimes I have children, sometimes I’m of an identifiable race or ethnicity, sometimes I belong to a religion … but always, always I’m free born just like you on the planet earth.

            ‘Were you aware that women are as likely as men to say that abortion should be illegal?’

            WHO the HELL introduced the argument of abortion here? For eons those humans of child bearing capacity, – by design, and I have no explanation why – females have the ultimate responsibility of determining survival post conception. You know NOTHING of our power and wisdom, dear Pro-Fess-Or, and your attempts to take over our bodies finally failed. When you demonstrate similar wisdom that women hold sacred, how to accommodate ALL creation – after all the womb carries every race, creed, color, gender – with a compassionate policy that engages both mother and father in the decision making process, I’ll consider you a credible contributor. Otherwise you are nothing but a “has been” bully, the tail of the dragon, lashing desperately.

          • Forbid someone of the Muslim faith what it’s been like to navigate the world you white males in the United States have created.

            Since white males are so evil, that means places traditionally rules by white males (Europe, North America, etc.) are hell holes, and places ruled by black males (Sub-Saharan Africa) and places rules by Asian males (Asia) are really great.

            Right?

          • Tom S. says:

            Since white males are so evil, that means places traditionally rules by white males (Europe, North America, etc.) are hell holes, and places ruled by black males (Sub-Saharan Africa) and places rules by Asian males (Asia) are really great.

            Right?

            Interesting….Saddam could have made an uncannily similar argument, or the executives at Seaworld.

            http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/why-killer-whales-belong-in-the-ocean-not-seaworld-180954333/?no-ist

            I’m surprised you were not dismissed much earlier on the issue of competence.

            Dr. McAdams, actually evaluating the justification for the interference and domination could trigger a crisis of faith even your hubris might not be able to mitigate. Don’t go there!

            https://books.google.com/books?id=-kykEEiazfgC&pg=PA66&lpg=PA66&dq=professor+dismissed+for+hubris&source=bl&ots=fqtqZgmPWn&sig=01F_9CfjhrM3oqGVeBB8_TnmpLQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiMuMCZsYjNAhVLRCYKHdcyAsQQ6AEIMDAE#v=onepage&q=professor%20dismissed%20for%20hubris&f=false
            Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War
            By Michael Isikoff, David Corn
            …..Laurie Mylroie….

            https://www.hrw.org/legacy/backgrounder/wrd/iraq-women.htm
            Human Rights Watch Briefing Paper
            Background on Women’s Status in Iraq Prior to the Fall of the Saddam Hussein Government
            November, 2003

            http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/01/0131_030203_jubilee2.html
            …..enslaved Africans became the labor force of choice in the Western Hemisphere—so much so that they became the overwhelming majority of the colonial populations of the Americas.

            Of the 6.5 million immigrants who survived the crossing of the Atlantic and settled in the Western Hemisphere between 1492 and 1776, only 1 million were Europeans. The remaining 5.5 million were African. An average of 80 percent of these enslaved Africans—men, women, and children—were employed, mostly as field-workers. Women as well as children worked in some capacity. Only very young children (under six), the elderly, the sick, and the infirm escaped the day-to-day work routine.

            More than half of the enslaved African captives in the Americas were employed on sugar plantations. Sugar developed into the leading slave-produced commodity in the Americas. …..

            https://www.nlm.nih.gov/nativevoices/timeline/170.html
            AD 1493: Spanish settlers enslave the Taíno of Hispaniola

            Spain founds Santo Domingo, the first of many towns on the Caribbean island Hispaniola (now the location of Haiti and the Dominican Republic). Spanish colonists force the Native Taíno people, on pain of death, to perform almost all labor on the island.

            Christopher Columbus, who needs to demonstrate the wealth of the New World after finding no gold, loads his ship with enslaved Taíno people. During the next four decades, slavery contributes to the deaths of 7 million Taíno. By 1535, the Taíno culture on Hispaniola is gone.

          • Dr. McAdams, actually evaluating the justification for the interference and domination could trigger a crisis of faith even your hubris might not be able to mitigate. Don’t go there!

            I’m not sure what your point is, Tom, other than that you did not like the Iraq War.

            Iraq was a hell hole under Saddam. It’s not real great under the current regime. Neither Saddam nor the current regime are white European males.

            So what is your point?

          • Tom S. says:

            My point was that Iraq ruled by Saddam was arguably a much better place for urban female residents to reside in, compared to post Bush
            invasion and occupation Iraq, that Seaworld executives pounded a similar drum as the one you were pounding, that killer whales had
            “better” lives in careers as Seaworld performers than in the wild, that it takes a certain kind of individual to comment as you chose to…

            Since white males are so evil, that means places traditionally rules by white males (Europe, North America, etc.) are hell holes, and places ruled by black males (Sub-Saharan Africa) and places rules by Asian males (Asia) are really great.

            Right?

            Your comment, quoted above, is reminiscent of, “better dead, than red.”

          • You know NOTHING of our power and wisdom, dear Pro-Fess-Or, and your attempts to take over our bodies

            Who has tried to take over your bodies?

            finally failed. When you demonstrate similar wisdom that women hold sacred, how to accommodate ALL creation – after all the womb carries every race, creed, color, gender – with a compassionate policy that engages both mother and father in the decision making process, I’ll consider you a credible contributor. Otherwise you are nothing but a “has been” bully, the tail of the dragon, lashing desperately.

            This is nothing but a tantrum on your part.

            If you have an argument to make, make it.

          • Tom S. says:

            Who has tried to take over your bodies?

            http://indianalawblog.com/archives/2016/06/ind_courts_stat_73.html
            Thursday, June 02, 2016
            Ind. Courts – State files response in ACLU/PPIK challenge to abortion law

            Federal Judge Tanya Walter-Pratt earlier set June 14th for a hearing on HEA 1337, which is being challenged by Indiana ACLU and Planned Parenthood. Here is the 12-page complaint, filed April 7th.

            Yesterday, per a news release from Attorney General Zoeller:

            On Wednesday in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, the state defendants filed their memorandum in opposition to the plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction.

            The State’s memorandum asks the U.S. District Court to deny the plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction and allow the statute to take effect as scheduled on July 1. The memorandum argues that the plaintiffs are unlikely to succeed on the merits of their challenge to HEA 1337 because the provisions of the law they challenge – including the regulation of how medical facilities dispose of fetal remains and the prohibition against discriminatory abortions based solely on race, sex and disability – do not violate the United States Constitution. * * *

            The State’s brief was drafted by Indiana Solicitor General Thomas M. Fisher and his colleagues. Please see this excerpt from the brief on page 1:

            (HEA 1337) is a response to recent technological advances that permit pregnant women to screen their fetuses for various physical characteristics during the first trimester. In short, the General Assembly is concerned that these new technologies will be used to discriminate based on race, sex, disability, and other characteristics, and with HEA 1337 it has adapted traditional anti-discrimination law to the abortion context in order to address that concern.

            Also, please see this excerpt:

            The new laws governing disposition of fetal remains merely modify existing regulations and implicate no specially protected rights. The Court should uphold them as a legitimate means of ensuring human remains are treated with dignity and respect.

            Here is the State of Indiana’s response filed June 1st, Defendants’ Memorandum In Opposition To Plaintiffs’ Motion For Preliminary Injunction.

            Posted by Marcia Oddi on June 2, 2016 12:10 PM

            “Discrimminate against…” ???? Do tell, Dr. McAdams? Who is the state is concerned is doing the discrminating, and what is the legislative “remedy” poised to become law. Who is at risk of losing a right, if they happen to be of little financial means and trapped in Indiana with a diagnoses amounting to not much more than a nuisance for a wealth woman to obtain relief from?

          • My point was that Iraq ruled by Saddam was arguably a much better place for urban female residents to reside in, compared to post Bush invasion and occupation Iraq,

            That may be true, and it’s clearly the case that things are worse for Christians. But that’s not because white European males are running Iraq.

            Things are best, in the world, for women in the nations traditionally run by white males of European ancestry.

            If we had been real imperialists, and had stayed and run the country, things would be better for women.

            And if we had kept a residual force and used it to fight ISIS, things would be better for women, Christians, various Muslim sects, and certainly gays.

          • >>> Who has tried to take over your bodies? <<<

            What's your point? That you are pro-abortion?

            If so, you need to know that women are as likely to oppose abortion being legal as men are.

            Blacks are as likely to oppose abortion being legal as whites are. Actually more so.

            http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/posc2201/Abortion_by_group_3.pdf

          • J.D. says:

            John McAdams writes: “Things are best, in the world, for women in the nations traditionally run by white males of European ancestry.”

            This is true, but not in a way that reflects well on the United States.

            According to the most recent Gender Gap Report by the World Economic Forum, the top four countries with the smallest gender gaps are Iceland, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. In other words, “things are best for women” if they live in countries that follow policies of social democracy, similar to the policies currently advocated by Bernie Sanders.

            http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/11/best-countries-for-women_n_4549918.html

          • Photon says:

            Tom S. where did the author of the reference you post get the idea that there were 7 million Taino , particulary on Hispaniola ?
            There weren’t 7 million Taino in the whole Caribbean-the local resources for a subsistence culture probably couldn’t support a tenth of that population! How do I prove to you that a claim that no real anthropologist or historian of the period would ever make-or even consider to make is untrue? It is unsubstantiated hyperbole to make a point-sort of like Dr. Aguilar’s lie about the U.S. selling Sarin gas to Saddam-nobody who wants to believe it will ever check it out, immunizing the poster from the truth.
            What is the point of posting links if the links themselves are worthless repositories of false information? Find me a reputable source that states that 7 million Taino lived on Hispaniola and I will apologize.

          • Tom S. says:

            You’ll “apologize”? I supported a quote with a link to its source. It is a link to a source a reasonable person would accept, although it
            is certainly reasonable to challenge the exactness of any number, especially a number of 7 million.

            That said, you’re the challenger. Since I linked to a source that is not controversial on its face, don’t ask me to do the work of defending the accuracy of the details. You offered an opinion as you always do, with an implied authority. This is a manipulation you’ve become famous for presenting.

            So as not to waste further reading time of other readers, here is another link with related information to consider.:
            http://www.smithsonianmag.com/people-places/what-became-of-the-taino-73824867/?no-ist

            Photon, I won’t reply to you again unless you present your own supporting, working link. Please do not refer to anything I’ve supplied for the consideration of other readers, displayed on the page linked above this paragraph. Do your own research, share links you’ve found, supporting your opinions or analysis.

        • Mr. Herrera,

          Why do you fall for the tactic of arguing within the frames that McAdams presents? This grouping 1,2,3,4, is gameshow nonsense.
          It is ludicrous…a game of rhetorical blather.
          \\][//

        • In other words, “things are best for women” if they live in countries that follow policies of social democracy, similar to the policies currently advocated by Bernie Sanders.

          And the Philippines is number 5!

          Odd that you should mention Bernie. Part of the index is having a female head of state. So Hillary would bump the U.S. up, and Bernie would not. Maggie Thatcher pushed the U.K. up.

          But a lot of the indices don’t make a lot of sense. For example, female labor force participation pushes the index up, but that could be an index of economic privation — women have to work who might prefer to be homemakers rather than work on a production line. Or would prefer to retire.

          But more generally: comparisons of this sort always disadvantage large diverse countries, and advantage small homogeneous countries.

          A better comparison would be the U.S. against the entire EU. The U.S. is actually in the middle of the European nations.

        • 1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus

          1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus is a 2005 non-fiction book by American author and science writer Charles C. Mann about the pre-Columbian Americas. The book argues that a combination of recent findings in different fields of research suggests that human populations in the Western Hemisphere—that is, the indigenous peoples of the Americas—were more numerous, had arrived earlier, were more sophisticated culturally, and controlled and shaped the natural landscape to a greater extent than scholars had previously thought.

          He notes that two of the six independent centers of civilization in the world arose in the Americas: the first, Norte Chico or Caral-Supe, in present-day northern Peru; and that of Mesoamerica in what is now Central America.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1491:_New_Revelations_of_the_Americas_Before_Columbus

          \\][//

    • Jean Davison says:

      On Fox News tonight a Trump supporter unintentionally said that Trump’s outspokenness “appeals to the middle crass,” which I think is priceless.

  4. “Willy, have you observed appreciable differences, at all?”~Tom

    Certainly Tom. The point is both “sides” march inexorably towards the TOTAL STATE, collectivism and authoritarian governance.
    Both “sides” have been in power for the last several generations.

    How did we end up in this panoptic maximum security state if there were any real resistance from one of these two “sides”?

    Who continues with renewed effort the phony wars that Bush started?
    Our ‘Dear Leader’ Obama the drone murderer.
    \\][//

    • Tom S. says:

      I see influences of Ayn Rand and McAdams in your reply. You refer to “collectivism” with disdain. What would the lives of scores of millions of Americans be like today if your politics were widespread? May 27, 1936, no social security retirement benefit, May 27, 1966, no medicare medical insurance coverage. All of government and all of the electorate are not the problem, they are the potential.

      As far as a practical and constructive approach, are the consequences of your opinion of Obama that much different than McAdams’s? Neither of you has any use for the man, you because he has been too oppressive and agressively militaristic, and Dr. McAdams partly because Obama has demonstrated too little of either. Do you exempt yourself from your broad brush?

      Could the American electorate have done better than voting in Obama? Really? It didn’t happen in a vacuum, coming on the heals of Cheney-Bush and emerging from the “process” of the “two” right wing political “parties”.

      There have been 153 years of steady progress, Willy, in spite of “the system,” not because of it. Of course it is not enough to be to either of our liking, but a list of where Obama has not taken our troops, despite the “opportunities,” indicates progress against all odds. To hear republicans tell it, Obama should have insisted on maintaining tens of thousands of US troops in Iraq post 2010, maintained an indefinite surge of twice the 30,000 troops he reluctantly ordered temporarily to Afghanistan, and done any number of large troop, military interventions in Syria and in Iraq against bogeyman du jour… con carne in Messopotamea, or whatever they’ve renamed it lately.

      I have affordable, comprehensive health insurance while I had none and no means to obtain it until passage of ACA.

      It is all relative, Willy. Maybe you are comfortable enough to be so angry and dismissive. Maybe your circumstances in 1863 or in 1936 would make the current ones look satisfactory. You and McAdams both seem to focus on the shortcomings with nothing to say about the accomplishment or the potential of government. If you’re young, black, or gay, these could seem the best of times. If you are a woman who remembers her greatgrandmother’s stories of petitioning for the right to vote, you might have a higher opinion. If you persist in accepting Snowden is some sort of limited hangout assigned to Moscow, that acceptance may not be constructive or inspiring.

      How much of what you conclude and proceed accordingly because of, is defensible through presenting supporting evidence?
      I talk about that too often because I don’t know how to get and keep my bearings without verifiable facts, and my self restraints seem remarkably similar to what you accuse the government of abandoning. Where do you get your bearings, and how dependent are they actually on suspicions?

      • Vanessa says:

        Some very pertinent questions and well said Tom.

      • “Where do you get your bearings”~Tom S.

        I think that each individual is responsible for a coherent epistemology.

        I think all individuals are possessed of Unalienable Rights to Liberty.

        I think that the individual’s right to Liberty is prime, and cannot justly be overridden by collective concerns.

        I think is is historically proven that so-called “government” is organized on the principles of coercion and the dictum of a monopoly on the use of force and violence.

        As such all governments are organized on the principles of ‘Might is Right’, ‘Ends are Justified by the Means’, as well as that the only organizational structure that can maintain a coercive authority is that of war, by promotion of “fear of the other” by whatever label du jour.

        I think that the true struggle has always been between the individual and the collective.

        A government powerful enough to provide all of your vital needs, is a government powerful enough to decide by caveat what those needs are.

        “To each according to his need. From each according to his ability” is in fact the collectivist credo. Call it Marxism, Socialism, Communism, Communitarianism, Fascism, or National Socialism.

        As a practical matter and as is shown to be historically true, the collective itself does not now, nor has it ever decided it’s own fate. That fate has always been dictated by the authority of the state.

        The true and original conception of individual Liberty is drawn from the Golden Rule. Those who grasp Liberty understand that it is predicated on the rights of ALL being upheld and protected, not by coercion but voluntarily.
        \\][//

      • “Could the American electorate have done better than voting in Obama? Really? It didn’t happen in a vacuum, coming on the heals of Cheney-Bush and emerging from the “process” of the “two” right wing political “parties”.”~Tom S.

        Is voting anything more than a charade? Is it not in fact a meaningless ritual that has little to no bearing on who is chosen by the Power Elite to be the next titular talking head for the technocratic state?

        It is my opinion, and I have expressed it before, that “democracy”, “voting”, “representation”, are all Orwellian Newspeak and doublespeak nonsense. It is PR burlesque.

        And absolutely NO ONE gets the PR but the pre-chosen candidates.

        I think those who doubt these propositions should go back to the primers on PR and Propaganda:

        “Public Opinion” by Walter Lippmann
        And:
        “Propaganda” by Edward Bernays

        Finally I think reading SKULL & BONES by Antony Sutton is absolutely necessary to grasping the architecture of political power in the modern era.
        \\][//

      • theNewDanger says:

        There have been 153 years of steady progress

        The mindset that “There have been 153 years of steady progress” is the capture-bonding that centrally planning collectivists need to continue controlling the free will of people for another 153 years. If it isn’t voluntary, IT IS COERCION.

        • Tom S. says:

          The mindset that “There have been 153 years of steady progress” is the capture-bonding that centrally planning collectivists need to continue controlling the free will of people for another 153 years. If it isn’t voluntary, IT IS COERCION.

          For the actual purpose of discussion, and in the context I presented, the Emancipation Proclamation was signed 153 years ago, (you did not ask about the reference to 153 years) how is your comment to be considered, other than to impress us that you embrace a radical view?
          IOW, what can I, or anyone, actually do with your comment? What can be learned from it, aside from you informing readers of your radical view. Is the condition of slavery not inferior to the condition after the abolition of slavery, or are you claiming there is no actual difference? Where is this ideal place on this planet in the year 1863, or even later, you can offer in comparison, the place where “free will” was allegedly abided? How were the poor, ill, handicapped, or gravely injured, attended to in your “free will” scenario? What exactly is “with the consent of the governed,” designed? Who would claim the authority to design it, implement it, and attempt to enforce implementation? How old are you? Have you ever been ill or injured, has your residence ever caught fire?

          • theNewDanger says:

            Where is this ideal place on this planet in the year 1863, or even later, you can offer in comparison, the place where “free will” was allegedly abided?

            I never claimed that such a place existed, and there doesn’t need to have been a place to compare to for someone’s concerns to be valid. Out of what school of fallacy do you operate?

            how is your comment to be considered, other than to impress us that you embrace a radical view?

            My “radical” concerns, as they may seem to you, are not to impress and the concerns of other readers aren’t to be framed in your questioning. They can ask questions for themselves.

            Is it “radical to ask” should moral ”free will” be determined by laws and/or institutions of coercion? Read a few new laws in the federal register every quarter and you will see that is the goal of damn near every POS legislation that gets added with little to no consent of the “governed”. This centuries’ long coercion is what is “radical”.

            (“Radical” is no less a pejorative than “lone nutter” or “conspiracy theorist”)

          • theNewDanger says:

            (you did not ask about the reference to 153 years)

            That was your reference to make clear. Now that you have made it clear as mud …

            It’s unclear why you are using an INERT amendment, which is fundamentally too limited for an exercise of addressing the totality of the coercion problem vs. your “153 years of steady progress”. Lincoln’s own message about The Emancipation Proclamation was that it was nothing more than a war measure. You taking the 13th Amendment to still hold effect today as the origin of “steady progress” since its inception is missing one enormous mechanism of enslavement: the issuance of money and how it affects every single human activity since fractional reserving was imposed on England in the 1600’s.

            Easier-to-manipulate inflationary measures were re-imposed on the US citizenry in 1913 within the communist “Federal” Reserve Act (undergirded in perpetuity by the systematically oppressive Income Tax Act). Unspecified slavery of ALL was made a permanent condition requiring a faux wage-based economy. Woodrow Wilson’s education plans lead almost exclusively to labor that was to pay (via income tax) for the issuance of his cultural Marxist masters’ currency. Interest covered by the tax base is owed to federal reserve bank members on every dollar issued. THIS is slavery. Advocacy of such a system or any subsystem based on it is the manifestation of capture-bonding.

            This alleged “steady progress” has been gained within an insidious yet massive vacuum of intertwining micro-trends of common foundational origins that together exhibit extraction of free will out of the development of subsequent generations the more the coercive state assumes involvement. It seems my concerns are of a greater magnitude than some war measure that had little effect on a war and has had virtually no effect on what it truly means to be enslaved today. The coercive tax-subsidized ACA and other collectivist-conjured central economic plans that only benefit private corporations are not saviors – they are the goals of parallel structure collectivists who can only achieve what they want via coercion that only applies to tax cattle downstream.

            How were the poor, ill, handicapped, or gravely injured, attended to in your “free will” scenario?

            By the free will of others, not coercion. Have you ever heard of volunteer police, fire, and ambulatory services? They often perform better than the corrupt “for hire” versions, with less coercion on the “front lines” (they are still enforcing unjust, unasked for laws, though).

            What exactly is “with the consent of the governed,” designed?

            This question is unintelligible. Feel free to revise.

            Who would claim the authority to design it, implement it, and attempt to enforce implementation?

            Only those that would opt to live within “it”. In other words, those who volunteer to live in it.

            How old are you?

            Seriously?

            Have you ever been ill or injured, has your residence ever caught fire?

            Assume the worst and make your point.

    • Tom S. says:

      sh, for some balance, your linked article describes a $2 million line of credit “to Clinton”.

      http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/03/11/clintons-contras-and-cocaine/
      March 11, 2016
      Clintons, Contras and Cocaine
      by Jeffrey St. Clair – Alexander Cockburn

      ….Arkansas…political king-maker Jackson Stephens, with his son Warren, helped raise more than $100,000 for Clinton. More important, Stephens’ Worthen National Bank extended Bill Clinton a $2 million line of credit in January 1992, when the campaign was reeling under multiple allegations of adultery.

      It was Jackson Stephens who brokered the arrival of.. Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI)–…

      http://www.nytimes.com/1992/02/05/us/1992-campaign-personal-finances-wealthy-investment-family-big-help-clinton.html
      Personal Finances; Wealthy Investment Family a Big Help to Clinton
      By JEFF GERTH,
      February 5, 1992
      …No one is suggesting wrongdoing in the Stephens-Clinton connection. But it is a vivid example of the sorts of enduring political relationships that enable a small-state politician like Mr. Clinton to become a contender in the campaign for the nomination. Scores of $1,000 Donors …
      ….Among these Stephens associates is Curt Bradbury,..who is now the chief executive of Worthen National Bank of Arkansas.., in which the Stephens family owns a 38 percent interest. Last month, the Worthen National Bank approved a credit line that allows the Clinton campaign to borrow up to $2 million….

      http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1026171349507350200
      How Oil Firm Linked to a Son Of Bush Won Big Drilling Pact
      Dec. 6, 1991
      ……In the oil-patch depression of the mid 1980s, Mr. Bush’s company merged with another concern, becoming Spectrum 7 Energy Corp. “… Uzielli, a director of Spectrum 7 and friend of Mr. Bush. “We had a lot of dry wells … . Things were terrible. It was dreadful.”

      Finding a buyer wasn’t easy. But in September 1986, Harken Energy swapped some of its own shares for the shares of Spectrum 7. Mr. Bush’s cut was worth roughly $600,000. “Getting Harken stock at that point turned out to be very good,” Mr. Uzielli recalls. In addition to becoming a Harken stockholder, Mr. Bush became a director and a consultant at $120,000 a year, later reduced to $50,000. (In mid-1990, Mr. Bush sold two-thirds of his Harken holdings at a significant profit; his remaining stake could still be worth millions if Harken hits a gusher in Bahrain.)

      What looked like a dull investment soon looked brighter. The company needed a cash infusion, and Mr. Bush, whose consulting contract listed “equity placements” among his duties, was there when Harken officials got together with Little Rock’s Stephens Inc.,….

      He needed no introduction to Jackson Stephens, having known him since the 1980 Reagan-Bush campaign. Mr. Stephens’s wife, Mary Anne, would soon become Arkansas co-chairman of the Bush for President campaign, while Mr. Stephens would donate $100,000 to Team 100, a GOP group that collected money for the campaign. Stephens Inc. kicked in another $100,000 to the Bush dinner committee last May.

      But on that spring day in Little Rock, cash for Harken was the topic. Ultimately, Stephens put a rescue plan in motion: Union Bank of Switzerland, which ordinarily didn’t invest in small U.S. firms, would make an exception, giving Harken $25 million in exchange for a stock interest…..

  5. Paulf says:

    I hate, hate, hate to sound like McAdams, but holy smokes it’s scary to hear people talk about non-related subjects.

    I hate the term conspiracy theorist because there is evidence for some conspiracies, and not for others. Lumping together every political event is foolish. So there is a ton of documented and credible information that lends credence to JFK being assassinated by someone other than Oswald, or at least in concert with others. Just these last couple of days, for example, there have been posts here about the botched autopsy and CIA lying about its role, things that logically infer something nefarious.

    But Vince Foster and the other batshit stuff about the Clintons like Whitewater are crazy talk. The investigations were implemented as part of a strategy to bog down any Democratic president so they can’t focus on policy. They have all been thoroughly investegated and debunked by Republicans as well as Democrats. GOP operatives have discussed these strategies for years.

    My point isn’t which party is better at running the country, it’s that people should stick to the subject at hand if they want to retain credibility.

    • “But Vince Foster and the other batshit stuff about the Clintons like Whitewater are crazy talk.”~Paulf

      These issues are relevant to the thread because Roger Stone & Trump introduced the issues – which is in fact the topic of this thread.
      \\][//

      • Paulf says:

        Yeah, but when people spout crazy talk about obviously bogus conspiracies, it calls into question whether they are rational when talking about JFK or if they are just Glenn Beck-type crazies who fall for anything.

        • “Yeah, but when people spout crazy talk about obviously bogus conspiracies..”~Paulf

          And how much research have you put into study of the drug running at Mena, Arkansas? Or the Whitewater schemes of the Clintons? Or of the details of Vince Fosters murder?

          You of course must recognize that all your talk of a conspiracy to kill President Kennedy is seen as “crazy talk” by a great number of people of the mainstream persuasion.
          \\][//

          • Paulf says:

            Oh wow, seriously? Words just fail.

            Yes, people think JFK conspiracy is crazy talk, and that’s why it’s important to not confuse it with actual crazy talk. You lose all credibility.

    • ” The investigations were implemented as part of a strategy to bog down any Democratic president so they can’t focus on policy.” — Paulf

      Do you think perhaps the strategy was to compromise the Executive Branch of government, regardless of who filled the role, in every instance?
      https://kids.usa.gov/three-branches-of-government/index.shtml

      • Paulf says:

        Leslie, no. It hasn’t happened to GOP presidents. People like Grover Norquist have long talked about how the plan is to make it impossible for Democratic presidents to govern. So even if Democrats become president, they accomplish as little as possible.

        But that has nothing to do with JFK.

      • Paulf, do you not think that Watergate was a set up of Nixon?

        • Avinash says:

          Luckily for Nixon,he was only driven away from the White House.Unlike JFK whose life was taken away.

          Both were ways to get rid of democratically elected presidents.

        • Paulf says:

          Leslie:

          Do I think Watregrate was planned by the intelligence agencies as a way to oust Nixon?

          No I do not. For one thing, the plan was Nixon’s. The “rat xucking,” the illegal campaign contributions, the spying on enemies, he was an active participant and planner.

          But did the CIA burglars botch it up to get back at him? Here again, I would say no. The fact that it ever came to light was the result of the luck of the two WP reporters and the axe that Mark Felt had to grind. But I don’t see any evidence that Felt was part of the intelligence community on the same way as Angleton and Dulles. And even with what he did, it never would have come to impeachment if Nixon had buried the evidence better.

          • Tom S. says:

            Hey Paul! I’ve posted about this before. I was certain this “author” was a sockpuppet. Now, in the last few days, “he” has emerged with
            a 700+ page “something” that my curiousity prompted me to plunk down $5.99 for the kindle edition….haven’t checked it out yet….
            The thing about Dryer, Jr. is that he turned out to be connected to Tom Devine, who was assigned by CIA to front a CIA Op that interacted at least four times with DeMohrenschildt and Clemard Charles. First meeting was 25 April, 1963, two weeks after Gen. Walker was shot at.
            Dryer, Jr. told author Joan Mellen he was close friend of Devine, growing up in Rochester, and he held separate meeting with DeM and Charles on 25 April, 1963. I got on to this because Devine’s h.s. graduating class had ten members, Devine was yearbook editor, and in the 1944 yearbook was a page reading, “Gone But Not Forgotten”. Dryer’s brother and Kenaf cultivation biz partner’s name, Peter was on that list.
            Peter had departed Devine’s class after ninth grade to prepare at Choate Academy. Anyway….in 1973, Devine marries a Bonesman’s (Samuel Wynn Mills) daughter on Jupiter Island. His best man was Bill Macomber…. housemate of DeMohrenschildt’s step-nephew and oil wildcat partner, Edward Gordon Hooker.: http://jfkfacts.org/coming-soon-ebook-jfk-cia/#comment-879398

            Macomber’s proximity to Hooker and close friendship with Devine makes it reasonable to suspect these reports were contrivances….that Devine was prebriefed on DeMohrenschildt:
            Wubriny/1 was Thomas J Devine :
            http://maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=8627&search=knickerbocker_and+wubriny#relPageId=7&tab=page

            Bush, with no documented direct involvement, and a former congressman and UN Ambassador, was described as “briefed” on aspects of the Op, by his friend, Devine:

            http://maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=12758&relPageId=2&search=gale_and%20devine
            MEMORANDUM:MESSRS. GEORGE BUSH AND THOMAS J. DEVINE, pg 2
            …I learned that Mr. George Bush, DCI designate has prior knowledge of the now terminated project
            Wubriny/LPDictum…. through Mr. Thomas J. Devine, a former CIA Staff Employee….

            Sorry, this requires time and concentration to wade through.:
            https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?14584-A-Rich-Man-s-Trick&p=103790#post103790

            Lo and behold, many years in the making:

            http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=22871
            Ashton Grey – Posted 29 May 2016 – 10:09 PM

            I’m very pleased to report that my book Watergate: The Hoax has been released and currently is available on Amazon, iBooks, and Barnes & Noble. The trade paperback version will be available on Amazon within a matter of days.

            Here is an excerpt from it, Chapter 20, “The Nixon Problem”: …..

            https://www.amazon.com/Watergate-Hoax-Ashton-Gray-ebook/dp/B01FTOWGSK

            (BTW, Caddy, aka “Mr. Watergate” instead of asking Grey anything about his new book, “smothers” Grey’s announcement with a
            link to some negative story about Woodward….topic, “Watergate” midpage: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showforum=163 )

            From my earlier comment.: (Ashton Gray was raising Dryer, Jr. in 2007….)
            ….
            http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=9041
            Ashton Gray – Posted 10 January 2007 –
            Who was Joseph F. Dryer—really? I mean who was he in the grander scheme of things?….

            Part I of II cont.

          • Tom S. says:

            Part II of II

            (…., ask me what I learned from that prompt by the then departed Gray.)

            http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=20227&page=2#entry321976
            Ashton Gray Posted 30 December, 2015
            “….Let no one ever underestimate your sniffer, Pat, …I am an author with a book. Because I am. It is already available in prerelease preorder, and the release date is 28 May 2016…”

            http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=20227&p=274725
            Pat Speer Posted 29 May 2013

            Ashton was a good writer, ..he swayed a lot of people in his direction…he had some people here wondering if I wasn’t a spook.

            …because I sniffed him out at the beginning, and suspected him of being a fraud….
            …..after he left here, I looked over a website to which he’d linked at one time, and found that the website had book after book by the same author (mostly on Scientology) and that one of the books… cover featured a white-haired man in a panama hat.

            …Gray was a fictional character dreamt up by some spaced-out former Scientologist.

            https://www.nashvillepost.com/blogs/postpolitics/2010/7/19/gill_on_hartline#comment-42783
            That “Omen Books” article
            by Bill Hobbs 2010-07-21
            …..He refused – repeatedly – to provide those simple answers.

            Seven weeks later, the story Mr. “Lockwood” was working on comes out on the website of a book publisher – a website that provides no corporate address,… It links to another book publisher’s website – ChaletBooks.com. ChaletBooks.com has no corporate address, phone number of any indication of who runs the company or where it is located. – http://www.omenbooks.com/omenreports/Omen_Reports/Tennessees_Political_Healthcare_Maze.html

            It promotes the works of two authors,.. “Ashton Gray,” the alleged author of a book allegedly published in 2008 titled Watergate: The Hoax which, you guessed it, asserts that the Watergate scandal ..was a hoax by the CIA.

            Even stranger, I ran the titles of a couple of the books the publisher claims to publish through Amazon.com and found … nothing. Ditto with searching Amazon….

            And if you try to buy something from (either) websites – you can’t….

            …..I’d bet that the article is a part of a planned attack from the Left…..

            http://www.nashvillescene.com/pitw/archives/2010/06/14/jeff-hartline-congressional-candidate-on-a-mission-from-planet-rabid
            Jeff Hartline: Congressional Candidate on a Mission from Planet Rabid
            By Bruce Barry Jun 14, 2010
            ……..
            Hartline is a confirmed climate-change denialist who apparently finds science inconvenient:…. The earth is not warming because of anything man is doing.”

            Hartline is so devoted to dismantling the federal government : “Eliminate useless federal regulations and remand control of business to the individual states.”

            Early 2008 :
            https://web.archive.org/web/20080507021914/http://www.chaletbooks.com/chaletbooks/Chalet_Titles.html

            July 2011 :
            https://web.archive.org/web/20130729204454/http://www.chaletbooks.com/chaletbooks/Chalet_Titles.html

            http://chaletbooks.com

          • lysias says:

            I started to read Ashton Gray’s book, but I stopped reading it, because he assumes there’s a contradiction if there’s only one receiver for a plurality of bugs. But I know from my own experience as a voice intercept operator in the Air Force that it’s possible to make a lot of sense of what’s said on a frequency where more than one person is speaking. When people are speaking on top of each other, you lose some stuff, sure, but it’s possible to infer most of what you miss from the context. And most of the time they aren’t talking on top of each other.

        • Jordan says:

          Nixon was set-up to fail, but he made the first step in bringing himself down.

          Nixon was a pawn of the powers that be, but he wasn’t going to go down quietly if he had to go down hard.

          Nixon had “the goods” on a lot of groups and individuals.

          Nixon was in over his head long before the 1960 election….

      • Ronnie Wayne says:

        Bingo Leslie. As was the public assassination of JFK in broad daylight. Regardless of who fills the role now.
        But who was/is doing the compromising?

      • Ronnie Wayne says:

        Yes, Leslie I Do think they were part pf a strategy. Though I’m not Paulf.

        • Paulf says:

          Tom:

          Sorry, but I don’t have the time to jump to links. If you could summarize what all that means, I’d appreciate it.

          Leslie, Ronnie:

          I don’t doubt that the intelligence people facilitated the arrangements between the people who shot JFK, mainly the Cuban exiles and Mafia. They’re hiding a lot. I don’t doubt that the intelligence agencies exert a great deal of pressure on presidents in general. The dynamics of that are probably very complicated and I wouldn’t presume to know the details.

          But such pressure wouldn’t work if they killed or ousted every president who did not obey their every command. Because if every US president was assassinated or impeached, the strategy would start to become obvious. And incoming presidents — rather than fearing the CIA — would be best protected by making the problem public. The intelligence pressure works only because it is so shadowy and behind the scenes.

          Now I’m open to changing my view if presented with evidence, but I would rather focus on talking about the facts of the JFK murder.

  6. sh says:

    So good people. What do you think of this?

    FBI Whistleblower: Pentagon, CIA, NATO and MI6 Were Masterminds Behind 9/11
    http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/09/sibel-2.html

    • I have followed Sibel Edmonds’ work for quite a few years now.

      She has a lot of useful insight and a keen mind. Her work on Gladio, and Gladio B, both in essay form, and as presented in her novel are chock full of fascinating information.

      Psst…don’t mention this to Paulf, he likely thinks that 9/11 as an inside job is “crazy talk”…grin
      \\][//

    • Jordan says:

      Yes, and they would have all availed themselves of their back-door networking, but that’s still not the whole picture….

      • sh says:

        Lt. Col. Robert Bowman, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Director of Advanced Space Programs Development under Presidents Ford and Carter.  U.S. Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions. (PhD in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering, Cal Tech).   Former Head of the Department of Aeronautical Engineering and Assistant Dean at the U.S. Air Force Institute of Technology.  22-year Air Force career.  Also taught Mathematics and English at the University of Southern California, the University of Maryland, and Phillips University.Member: Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth Association Statement: 

        “Scholars and professionals with various kinds of expertise—including architects, engineers, firefighters, intelligence officers, lawyers, medical professionals, military officers, philosophers, religious leaders, physical scientists, and pilots—have spoken out about radical discrepancies between the official account of the 9/11 attacks and what they, as independent researchers, have learned. 

        They have established beyond any reasonable doubt that the official account of 9/11 is false and that, therefore, the official “investigations” have really been cover-up operations. 

        Thus far, however, there has been no response from political leaders in Washington or, for that matter, in other capitals around the world. Our organization, Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth, has been formed to help bring about such a response. 

        We believe that the truth about 9/11 needs to be exposed now—not in 50 years as a footnote in the history books—so the policies that have been based on the Bush-Cheney administration’s interpretation of the 9/11 attacks can be changed. 

        We are, therefore, calling for a new, independent investigation of 9/11 that takes account of evidence that has been documented by independent researchers but thus far ignored by governments and the mainstream media.”

    • Jordan says:

      Now people might be willing to take a much harder look at the links between Clay Shaw and Operation Gladio and what his real function was.

  7. sh says:

    That the whole 911 operation was a false flag operation, is easily understood from the more obviously false flag anthrax letters:

    THIS IS NEXT
    TAKE PENACILIN [sic] NOW
    DEATH TO AMERICA
    DEATH TO ISRAEL
    ALLAH IS GREAT

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

In seeking to expand the range of informed debate about the events of 1963 and its aftermath, JFKFacts.org welcomes comments that are factual, engaging, and civil. more