Conspiracies: Are they real?

[EnderAndrew]

This is a really good read, as it is very thorough, and cites references all throughout.

 

http://www.assassinationweb.com/scott.htm

[Reveilled]

Okay, I'll now admit that I'm out of my depth. I haven't looked at the whole thing in the depth that is really required to have a proper debate over it all (I'm a moon hoax debunker, not a Kennedy conspiracy expert). I'll give you the field, Ender, and now bow out of the debate, as the longer I stay in this, the more likely I am to be utterly defeated due to my lack of knowledge. Perhaps someone with greater experience than I can deal with Warren and the Committee on Assassinations.

 

But hey, at least I got the thread back on topic. "

[alanschu]

Errr, Ender...it looks like you just said that both of Kennedy's shots seem to have come from the rear.

[EnderAndrew]

That paragraph lists both part of the reason why someone suspects a grassy gnoll shooter (forward and left motion) as well as the opposite view point. The whole article seemed to play devil's advocate and support both sides.

 

I listed it to be objective, and as a source for some of the disagreement about where the shots came from.

[DownWithTheIlluminati]

Of course conspiracies are real. The truth is, a covert network of elite families and secret societies have controlled everything for quite a long time. A good place to start is the JFK assassination. John F. Kennedy was suspected of being a Communist sympathizer by some in the US military. Through his actions, he made enemies with the CIA, the Military-Industrial-Complex, and the Federal Reserve. These are very powerful enemies.

 

Consider these points:

 

1. To shoot like Oswald did took incredible skill. Experts hired by the Warren Commission tried to duplicate Oswald's feat, but they all failed. This means that Oswald must have had better skill than expert sharpshooters. Why, then, did Nelson Delgado, who served with Oswald in the Marines, say that he was a poor shooter? If Oswald was a poor shooter as Delgado tells us, then the idea of him being able to do what he did on 11/22/1963 seems highly unlikely. Delgado said that they did not want his story.

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=tKZbSUm2eFY

 

2. The official story is that three bullets were fired. The first shot missed and the second bullet hit both Kennedy and Connally, while the third shot hit Kennedy in the back of the head and killed him. Since Kennedy and Connally had many wounds, the first shot missed, and the third shot hit the head, the second bullet had to account for all of these wounds. Therefore, they created the "Single/Magic Bullet Theory" which suggested that the bullet bounced/tumbled around, causing all the wounds (I'm not making this up). Cyril Wecht, one of the leading forensics experts in America, examined bullets that the Warren Commission test-fired and argued that these bullets hit one bone and became incredibly deformed, but the bullet featured in the single bullet theory caused seven wounds, had to go through the spine, and pulverized a heavy bone, yet came out virtually undamaged (Except for some damage to the base, which is typical).

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=OV5d4p4FKsY

 

3. A number of witnesses who were interviewed on video by Mark Lane said that shots were fired from the Grassy Knoll area.

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=zVHyFZuzGH4

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=tm3neVe8Nlw

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=gLd3O-Tch6o

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=b-IXYfge2Ys

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=5VaJQgLmeTg

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=iJE9XQZvis8

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=pweuPLTVfl4

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=55jY6RUvxAI

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=s_hV3DhPT3I

 

4. A second rifle was found in the Book Depository. Police who found this described it as a 7.65mm Mauser, which is different from the Mannlicher Carcanno rifle that Oswald was said to have used. When Oswald's alleged rifle was found (The Mannlicher Carcano), the Mauser disappeared.

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=dPIo8B7S1k4

 

5. A previously unknown fingerprint on a box in the area Oswald was alleged to have fired from was identified in 1998. It was traced back to Malcolm E. 'Mac' Wallace, a convicted killer with close ties to Lyndon B. Johnson.

http://spot.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_.../breakthru.html

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKwallaceM.htm

 

6. The Willis family reported that shots came from in front and to the right of Kennedy's car. They and Beverly Oliver said that the back of Kennedy's head blew out, indicating that he was shot from the front.

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=c2-_UhD3Qgk

 

7. The Oswald police-lineups appeared to be set up in order to make witnesses think that they saw Oswald.

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=JskQDYovBGs

 

8. The first reports and the Parkland Hospital witnesses reported that the wound below Kennedy's adam's apple was an entry wound. Analysis of the Zapruder film indicates that. This shows that a bullet entered the front of Kennedy's throat.

http://www.nytimes.com/books/98/04/12/spec...on-kennedy.html

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=u3uH7FHjCeQ

 

9. The people in Dallas said that the casket was ceremonial. They described it as being bronze, very heavy, and high class. The people in Bethesda who did the autopsy say that the casket was regular and gray. They specifically said that it wasn't bronze. One of them was shown a photo of the casket in Dallas and said that it wasn't the one they saw. This means that the body was switched into a different casket.. It means that at some time.. it was moved. There was a 'V' cut into the right side of Kennedy's head that doctors said wasn't there before. It covered a small hole in that area which many people suspected was the entry for the fatal bullet. So, what if the body was stolen at some time between it's trip from Dallas to the autopsy in Bethesda. When it was stolen, operatives from government agencies stole the body and cut it up. The fact that the descriptions of how it left Dallas and how it came to Bethesda (Body bag, no body bag, Bronze casket, Gray casket)

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=hKPTxvYhi4s

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=YKDUFY55pes

 

10. The doctors who examined Kennedy's head say that there was a large wound in the back of his head that looked like the back of the head was blasted out. Since the entry hole is always the small hole and the exit hole is always the big one (Because of the explosion of the bullet), it is safe to say that they are describing an exit hole. Now, why would there be an exit hole in the President's head? That would mean that a shot hit him in the front and went out the back of his head. Thus, a shot from the front, not the back. Thus, conspiracy.

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=JhWJowvbtxs

 

11. Oswald denied being the shooter. When they said tests showed he had fired a gun recently, the reporters asked if the tests showed that he fired a rifle. Instead of saying yes, they just said "A gun". They admit that no eyewitnesses saw Oswald fire a rifle.

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=rzCo7p--VT8

 

12. Before Oswald could get a trial, he was killed by Jack Ruby. There was no real motive given for the shooting. Ruby stated that the people behind this 'would never let the true facts come above boards to the world' and said 'they had so much to gain'. When asked if these people were in very high positions, he said 'Yes'. Ruby had links to Cuba and the mob.

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=GaUDGTw6D_A

 

12. Dr. Crenshaw reported that, despite the law of Texas stating that someone who dies there has to have an autopsy there, a bunch of agents stormed in and stole the body. When doctors tried to say "Hey! Stop it! This is against the law! Let us do an autopsy!" they were threatened by the agents. If an autopsy was done that soon, would it have revealed a shot from the front? According to Crenshaw, there was an entry wound in the front and an exit wound in the back.

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=OpBDuSJeH14

 

13. According to witness reports, Oswald was not the left-wing Marxist everyone thought he was. In fact, he was connected to the far right! He was linked to a group of CIA assets and Cubans in the office of Guy Banister, a right-wing, Anti-Castro/Communist and the FBI chief in Chicago. His office was being used for CIA operations. According to Ron Lewis, an employee of Banister, Oswald was a gunrunner for Banister.

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=2_BZk5tkyno

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=8b90d3TIKIw

 

14. Based on the times/distances, Oswald didn't have enough time to make it from the Texas School Book Depository to the scene where the government says Tippit was murdered.

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=uf8D6NuLIhw

 

15. Rose Cherami, an employee of Jack Ruby's, was found on the road two days before the assassination. When she was brought into the hospital, she tried to tell them that Kennedy would be killed and that it was common knowledge in the underworld.

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=kA-p6qCfBW0

 

16. When the witnesses charged the Grassy Knoll, the Dallas Police leading them, they apprehended a man on the Knoll. This man claimed he was a secret service agent and pulled out identification. The problem was, aside from the agents in the car, there was no secret service agents in Dallas that day. Who was this guy, why was he on the Knoll, why was he impersonating a secret service agent, and how did he have ID to pass himself off as one? My conclusion is that he's a deep cover agent of some sort.

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=M5Yf_H5v47Y

 

For an endless chain of evidence that the assassination was a conspiracy, check out the videos on this YT account (Interviews, Documentaries, Audios, Clips, Etc.): http://ca.youtube.com/user/GJJdude

[Gfted1]

Now thats one thorough bot!

[Calax]

if thats a bot I'm a woman

[DownWithTheIlluminati]

Now thats one thorough bot!

 

Whenever I come to a forum and post something long, they say I'm a bot!

 

Seriously, watch this video on the JFK assassination:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2...Aw&q=jfk+ii

 

It is the final word, in my opinion. The strongest evidence of a conspiracy all bunched together. The assassination explained.

 

-A shot hit Kennedy from the Grassy Knoll and exited out the back of his head.

 

-13 shots were fired, not three (as the government would have you believe). A hail of bullets was directed by a team of assassins.

 

-Kennedy's body was stolen and, in the five minutes when nobody saw the body (When everyone was watching Johnson being sworn in), the body was mutilated to cover up frontal wounds.

 

-George H.W Bush was deeply involved. E. Howard Hunt (An admitted CIA assassin) is the likely killer.

[Hildegard]

So Oswald wasn't the only shooter, in fact a scapegoat. But what's new there? Nothing, but most people just don't give rats ass about it, why would they...they're too busy working to pay off their neverending debts and life, as most know it, goes on...

 

I hope you don't write that post every time you come on a new forum

[DownWithTheIlluminati]

So Oswald wasn't the only shooter, in fact a scapegoat. But what's new there? Nothing, but most people just don't give rats ass about it, why would they...they're too busy working to pay off their neverending debts and life, as most know it, goes on...

 

I hope you don't write that post every time you come on a new forum

 

Most people should give a rat's ass, because:

 

1. A coup happened in 1963 and the government continues to lie about it.

 

2. It proves that shadow elements of the US government are working behind the scenes and arranging malicious things. The shadow elements that organized the Kennedy assassination are the same shadow elements that brought us 9-11, 7-7, 3-11, WTC93, and the Oklahoma City Bombing.

 

3. George H.W Bush is at the center of the assassination. He continues to have influence today and his son has been President for the last 8 years. He's been buddies with Bill Clinton.

 

4. Understanding the truth of the Kennedy assassination helps one understand the 'bigger picture' of the conspiracy.

 

The JFK assassination is just the tip of the iceberg.

[Slowtrain]

Its like somebody recreated this thread from frog DNA.

[Darth InSidious]

Beware, the world is in fact ruled by four evil potato-heads, animated by the evil wizard Mong The Imperishable.

 

You see, if you add up all the letter 'a's in the KJV version of the Book of Revelation, and divide by the number of mentions of John in the Gospel of John, and multiply by the Egyptian Sacred Super-cubit* (~900 ft), then multiply again by the number of feet between the Great Pyramid and Tipperary, divide by the square root of the size of Phidias' Zeus and then add the number of people who can fit into the House of Representatives of the United States if they all stood on one leg...

 

*May be subject to complete invention by author

Edited December 13, 2008 by Darth InSidious

[DownWithTheIlluminati]

(Information from "JFK II")

 

Time to name names.

 

Let's start by answering the question of who shot John F. Kennedy. A memo written by Nixon's CIA director, Richard Helms, was cited in an issue of Spotlight magazine. This memo stated that E. Howard Hunt, an admitted CIA assassin, was in Dallas the day Kennedy was shot and was involved in the conspiracy. Being a CIA assassin, he, in theory, would have been the most competent shooter. Hunt sued Spotlight magazine for releasing the memo. When asked where he was on the day Kennedy was shot, he contradicted himself countless times. First, he was at work all day. Then, he said he had went to work in the afternoon. Then, he backpedaled and said he went to work in the morning. He said that the CIA records would prove this, but they didn't. Then he said he was at home with his kids all day watching TV.

 

During the trial, CIA director Richard Helms testified that a woman named Marita Lorenz worked for the CIA. Lorenz testified that she was part of Operation 40, a CIA operation that involved staging terrorist attacks against Cuba. One day, her partner, Frank Sturgis, told her to pack her bags. They were going to Dallas. They went to Dallas and, at the place they stayed, E. Howard Hunt came in using the name "Eduardo". Hunt began passing out guns and ammunition. Lorenz realized that this was some kind of CIA attack on US soil and left. She went to Miami. The next day, Sturgis returned to say "You should have been there. We made history. We killed the President!".

 

The trial ended and Spotlight magazine was found innocent of slandering Hunt.

 

Since we've caught one perp, let's follow him to see who else we can find. E. Howard Hunt has some interesting connections. Richard Nixon, who is seen as one of the most corrupt presidents ever, chose Hunt to lead the Watergate burglars. We all know the rest of the story. The Watergate operation was busted and Hunt went to jail. While in jail, though, Hunt started demanding money from Nixon. He told reporters that he was a CIA assassin. Hunt was telling Nixon that if he didn't give him a million bucks and a get out of jail free card, he would tell all about the JFK assassination. Nixon's response? Nixon then panicked and told the FBI to stop investigating Hunt's activities. This is actually what got Nixon resigned. If Hunt was lying, why did Nixon ruin his career just to help him out? A book by H.R. Haldeman, who served as Nixon's chief of staff, provides us with the answer. In the book, Haldeman states that Nixon told him that if the investigation would open up "the whole Bay of Pigs thing". Haldeman stated that "It seems that in all of those Nixon references to the Bay of Pigs, he was actually referring to the Kennedy assassination.". Nixon ordered the FBI to stop investigating Hunt, which caused an uproar that ended up with his resignation, so that Hunt would not come public about the assassination of John F. Kennedy.

 

Now, why would Nixon be concerned if he wasn't involved? It seems that Hunt's actions have led us to another JFK assassination perp: Richard Nixon. In fact, a recent document revealed an amazing smoking gun about Nixon's connections to the Kennedy assassination. A 1947 FBI document stated that Jack Ruby, the Cuba/Mob-connected strip club owner that killed Oswald was working for Nixon. Ruby worked for Nixon back when Nixon was a congressman. Nixon was actually in Dallas the day Kennedy was shot. Everyone who was alive back then said that they remembered where they were, but Nixon apparently doesn't. He gave two different stories. The first was to the Reader's Digest and the second was to Escquire Magazine. The first story had him stating that he boarded a plane from Dallas and New York and then, when he was in a cab, a man ran from the street corner screaming that the President had been shot. The second story was similar. He caught a cab, but.. he said that a woman came out of her house screaming and crying about Kennedy being shot. A blatant contradiction. Why does Nixon remember two different ways that he learned about the assassination? Is he, like Hunt, contradicting himself because the truth proves that he is involved in the assassination?

 

Following Hunt, we've been led to Nixon. Nixon has connections to another perp, Jack Ruby. The next perp that Nixon will lead us to will shock you.. John Connally. Connally was the governor of Texas. He was hit a few times when the assassin team was firing at the car. He changed his story to conform with the Warren Commission and contradicted witnesses who reported a shot from the front by saying that Kennedy slumped forward, indicating a shot from behind. What is his connection to Nixon? Well, Nixon, the leader of the Republican party, shocked people by bringing Connally, the leading Texas DEMOCRAT, into his administration as the Secretary of Commerce.

 

So, Nixon, Connally, Ruby, Hunt, and others were perpetrators.. but it's time to look at who controls these people. Do some research on the Ford family, the Harriman family, and the Rockefeller family. All of these men had connections to the Nazis. One man who investigated the Nazi connections to these 'dons' of American corruption was J. Edgar Hoover. One of the powerful American organizations that Hoover investigated was Union Banking Corporation, which was controlled by the Harriman family and the Bush family (Yes, THAT Bush Family). George W. Bush's grandfather, Prescott Bush, was a director and CEO of the Union Banking Corporation. Hoover's investigations uncovered Nazi connections to the bank. It was seized by the US as a Nazi bank and shut down. Keep in mind that Hoover knew that the Bushes were Nazis.

 

Prescott Bush ran this bank with Averell Harriman, a member of the powerful Harriman family. Averell Harriman has close ties to E. Howard Hunt, who we have seen was one of the JFK assassination perps and likely a member of the assassins team. During the trial of Hunt's lawsuit against Spotlight magazine, Hunt testified that after World War II, he was in Paris, working directly for Averell Harriman. So, Hunt, the likely shooter in the JFK case, was working in Paris for Nazi Averell Harriman after the Second World War. Harriman was running a Nazi bank with Prescott Bush. This raises the possibility of a Bush connection to the assassination.

 

Prescott Bush has ties to Nixon, a JFK assassination perp who had E. Howard Hunt, John Connally, and Jack Ruby working for him. Bush's ties to Nixon are quite close ones. Nixon's success in politics was created by Prescott Bush, who sponsored him. So, Prescott Bush, a Nazi, ran a Nazi bank with Averell Harriman, a Nazi and a member of the powerful Harriman family. Averell Harriman was the boss of JFK perp E. Howard Hunt after WWII. Richard Nixon, who had JFK perps E. Howard Hunt, Jack Ruby, and John Connally all working for him, was politically successful because of the sponsorship of Nazi Prescott Bush, who was running a Nazi bank with Nazi Averell Harriman. One big happy family.

 

Prescott has ties to the Nazis, the Harrimans, and to many JFK perps.. but we still haven't found direct evidence of a Bush connection to the JFK assassination. We have, however, found evidence of a tightly-nicked, Nazi-connected clique involving Prescott Bush and Averell Harriman on the higher level, Richard Nixon on the 'medium-level', and E. Howard Hunt, Jack Ruby, and John Connally on the 'lower level'. This clique appears to have been deeply involved with the JFK assassination.

 

Now, we come to the center perp of this story. This perp uncovers the whole big picture, which we have already uncovered in part with the exposure of the Harriman-Bush clique. This perp is none other than George H.W Bush. The son of Prescott Bush and the father of George W. Bush, the current President of the United States. George H.W Bush was the son of Prescott Bush, a member of the Nazi-connected, Harriman-Bush clique that was behind the Kennedy assassination. He was brought into the White House by JFK perp and clique member Richard Nixon, who made him US Ambassador to the UN. Nixon had E. Howard Hunt trailing behind him in the White House. The fact that he is the son of 'high level' clique member Prescott Bush and is connected to Richard Nixon and E. Howard Hunt is evidence that he was well-connected with the clique.. but that doesn't directly connect him with the assassination.

 

So.. what evidence directly connects George H.W Bush to the JFK assassination? Let's start with a memo written by J. Edgar Hoover entitled "ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY". This recently released memo discusses a meeting between the FBI and the CIA the day after the assassination. It states that Bush was one of two CIA officials who was to get Hoover's report on the activities of the Anti-Castro Cubans. In 1974, Bush became the director of the CIA. He said that prior to being the director, he had no connection to the CIA. This memo was a scandal, because it showed that in 1963, at the time of Kennedy's assassination, Bush was a CIA official. This means that Bush was CIA during both of his failed attempts to become a Senator (1964, 1970) and when Nixon brought him and E. Howard Hunt into the White House.

 

When George H.W Bush was confronted with this information in 1992, the response was that it must be "another George Bush". They stated that it was George William Bush, who had worked for the CIA and DIA. George William Bush came public, though, in saying that the memo was clearly not referring to him, because he was a lowly analyst for the CIA and had no contact with the people the George Bush of the memo had contact with. So, their explanation turned out not to be true.

 

So, the memo shows that there was a guy called "George Bush" in the CIA in 1963 who supervised the Anti-Castro Cubans, which we have already seen played a role in the assassination of John F. Kennedy through the CIA's Operation 40 and Frank Sturgis, as Marita Lorenz revealed in her testimony. This "George Bush" was a supervisor of the CIA-controlled group that was directly involved in the JFK assassination (Anti-Castro Cubans). This guy had to have been involved.

 

So, was George H.W Bush the "George Bush" in the memo, or another spook who shared his name? It seems that it was George H.W Bush. We will start with his connections. Checking out connections is how we uncovered the Bush-Harriman clique in the first place. Before we go directly into the connections of George H.W Bush, let's examine the connections of another spook.. Allen Dulles. Dulles had connections to Nazi banks and companies. His brother, John Foster Dulles, had close connections to Nazi Germany and wrote "Heil Hitler" on his letters.

 

As CIA director, Dulles brought hundreds of Nazi scientists into the US to work for the CIA. Clearly, Dulles had connections to the clique. This wasn't the only seemingly inappropriate job he got. As the director of the CIA, he launched the Bay of Pigs invasion (A CIA-AntiCastroCuban operation) against Kennedy's orders. Kennedy fired him, and then, he shocked many people by becoming one of the most influential members of the Warren Commission, the team that investigated Kennedy's death. If your boss was killed, would you expect that a co-worker they fired would be allowed to have such control over the investigation of their death? Allen Dulles, because of his close connections to the CIA and the Anti-Castro Cubans, was probably one of the supervisors of the assassination.

 

So, Allen Dulles was a Nazi.. he was also chosen to be the first director of the CIA. Who would get a Nazi to run the CIA? Especially after the Second World War? Perhaps it is because he was a member of the Bush-Harriman Clique. In fact, in the 30s and 40s, Allen Dulles was a close business partner with both Prescott Bush and Averell Harriman. In fact, Prescott and Averell have close CIA connections themselves. During World War I, Prescott Bush worked for Army Intelligence, which was the CIA of that time. Through Averell Harriman, Bush is tied to Richard Bissell, the director of CIA operations for the Bay of Pigs , who was fired by Kennedy. Bissell, like JFK perp E. Howard Hunt, worked for Averell Harriman before becoming part of the CIA.

 

In 1962, the time Kennedy fired Dulles and was working to dismantle the CIA, Prescott Bush partnered up with William J. Casey, who was the CIA director under Ronald Reagan. Bush and Casey created the National Strategy Information Center, an organization that would oppose Kennedy's efforts to dismantle the CIA.

 

One might wonder "How could he have enough control in the CIA to be a supervisor of the JFK Assassination? He had been fired!".. this brings us to the key point. The CIA is more of a community than an organization. A top-secret, shadowy community. Even after Dulles was fired, there would be elements within the CIA that stayed loyal to Dulles. Dulles was connected to the Nazis, the CIA, Prescott Bush/Averell Harriman/Union Bank, and was one of the key perpetrators in the Kennedy assassination. He is another member of the Nazi-connected, Bush-Harriman clique. On a side note, we can't forget that the Rockefellers and Fords are part of this elite clique. This all brings us back to George H.W Bush. Was he a member of the clique himself? If he was, then the George Bush mentioned in the Hoover memo was most certainly him. Let's take a look at Bush's connections.

 

George H.W Bush, Prescott Bush, Prescott's father George Herbert Walker, George Herbert Walker's uncle George Herbert Walker Jr., Averell Harriman, Averell Harriman's brother Roland Harriman, Robert Lovett (Architect of the CIA), and F. Trubee Davidson (Director of Personnel for the Central Intelligence Agency) all have something in common, besides all being members of the clique. They all went to Yale University, where they joined a secret society called Skull & Bones. Skull & Bones has a bad rap. It's been known to be a top-secret, elitist group that celebrates racism, robbery, and death. It was founded by the father of a US President and the cousin of a man who was running one of the largest Opium operations in the world at the time.

 

So, the Bushes and the Harrimans were both part of the Skull & Bones society. This is what connects George H.W Bush to the CIA. His father, Prescott, had picked both F. Trubee Davidson and Robert Lovett to be members. They owed their membership in this powerful group to him. When these 'old' Skull & Bones members left, the new ones came in. This included George H.W Bush and Endicott Davidson, the son of F. Trubee Davidson. Bush and Endicott were Skull & Bones brothers. They were in the club at the same time. In 1948, George H.W Bush, a member of Skull and Bones, left Yale in search of a job. At this time, F. Trubee Davidson, was hiring for the CIA. Now, members of Skull & Bones are generally supposed to help one another up to the top. If you are a Skull & Bones member and you have to decide between 9 people to pick for a job, and only one of them is Skull & Bones, you go with him.

 

Our question is "Is the Hoover memo talking about George H.W Bush?". We seem to have some circumstantial evidence indicating that George H.W Bush was CIA. When he left Yale, looking for a job, the man hiring for the CIA was F. Trubee Davidson, a fellow member of the Skull & Bones Society, which had it's members help each other get to the top. To add to this, F. Trubee Davidson owed his membership to this powerful society to Prescott Bush, the father of Bones member George H.W Bush, who, remember, was looking for a job at this time. Further, Davidson's son was the Skull & Bones brother of George H.W Bush and the Bush family lawyer.

 

If you still don't get it, look:

 

-The Skull & Bones members are supposed to help one another get to the top.

 

-F. Trubee Davidson, a member of Skull & Bones, was hiring for the CIA in 1948.

 

-George H.W Bush had left Yale and was looking for a job in 1948.

 

-F. Trubee Davidson owed his membership to Prescott Bush, George H.W Bush's father.

 

-F. Trubee Davidson's son was the Skull & Bones brother of George H.W Bush and the Bush family lawyer.

 

Do you get it, yet? With F. Trubee Davidson doing the hiring, George H.W Bush could have gotten into the CIA in a flash. This isn't all the circumstantial evidence, either. Remember, George H.W Bush's father, Prescott, was an intelligence officer, and had been a close business partner of Allen Dulles, the first director of the CIA. Further, through Averell Harriman, Prescott Bush was connected to E. Howard Hunt, an admitted CIA assassin, and Richard Bissell, director of operations for the CIA. So, in addition to having a Bones member who he was well-connected with doing the CIA hiring WHILE HE WAS LOOKING FOR A JOB, he had a father who had tons of CIA connections!

 

Are you getting the picture? It's obvious that the "George Bush" mentioned in the Hoover memo is George H.W Bush. Bush had a father with tons of CIA connections and he was well-connected with the head of hiring for the CIA at the time he was looking for a job. Remember that the CIA is a community. Personal connection is everything. Thinking along these lines, George H.W Bush was closely connected to F. Trubee Davidson, who was just the man to get him a CIA job in 1948, when he was looking for a job.

 

But, let's go further. What did George H.W Bush do after he left Yale? He went to work for Neil Mallon, who was the close friend and Skull & Bones brother of Prescott Bush and a recruiter for the CIA. This just gets better and better. Time for another recap.

 

George H.W Bush, son of CIA-connected Prescott, went from being the Skull & Bones brother of the head of CIA hiring's son, to working directly for the recruiter of CIA, who had been the Skull & Bones brother of his father. These connections make it completely obvious that George Bush was in the CIA when Hoover's memo said he was. It wasn't another George Bush, it wasn't a fake memo.. It was a real memo and it was the real George H.W Bush.

 

Want more evidence? A letter revealed that Prescott Bush, CIA recruiter Neil Mallon, and then-CIA-head Allen Dulles had a meeting to discuss their "pilot project in the Carribean". In 1959, the same year Allen Dulles had begun planning the CIA invasion of Cuba (Bay of Pigs), George H.W Bush created Zapata Offshore Oil. Zapata's oil rigs 'just happened' to be 30 miles away from Cuba in an area where CIA operations were ongoing. Zapata's oil rigs were near Cay Sal, an island that was used by the CIA for supplying. What were the supplies they were getting used for? For Operation 40 and other Anti-Castro operations conducted by the CIA. Remember that the personnel involved in Operation 40 were the shooting team that took out John F. Kennedy, as exposed by the testimony of Marita Lorenz.

 

Need even more evidence that George H.W Bush was CIA at the time? The Anti-Castro activities in Cuba were supervised by none other than E. Howard Hunt. The codename for the CIA's invasion of Cuba, the Bay of Pigs, was "Operation Zapata". Remember, George H.W Bush's company, which was right in the middle of CIA operations near Cuba, was called Zapata Offshore. Many former Military/CIA officials have said that Bush and Zapata Offshore were connected to CIA operations. Is it just an amazing coincidence that the CIA named it "Operation Zapata"? Zapata Offshore's links to CIA activities in that area suggest otherwise.

 

So, why would George H.W Bush be stupid enough to have the operation named after his own oil company? Well, he has a habit of naming things after things in his personal life. George H.W Bush served in World War II as a pilot. He named his plane "The Barbara II". When that plane was shot down, his next plane was named "The Barbara III". Barbara is, of course, the name of his wife. Now, get this. The CIA was using a Navy ship to prepare for the Bay of Pigs invasion. They were using it to load equipment. No one was supposed to know that this was a US Navy ship. Therefore, it was made to look like a non-USMilitary ship and called... "The Barbara". Yep, you read that right.

 

Let's put our thinking caps on. Remember that after WWII, E. Howard Hunt went to work directly for Averell Harriman in Paris. He then left Harriman's office to join the CIA, where he supervised the Bay of Pigs activities. At the same time, Richard Bissell left Harriman's office to join the CIA and direct planning for the Bay of Pigs operation, putting him in charge of Hunt, who had left Harriman's office to join the CIA at the same time he did. At the same time two Harriman associates (Hunt and Bissell) went from his office to become CIA operatives who both supervised the Bay of Pigs operation, the son (George H.W Bush) of Harriman's closest associate (Prescott Bush) moves to the very same area where Hunt and Bissell are operating.

 

There can be no doubt about it. The Hoover memo that named "George Bush" as a CIA supervisor of the Anti-Castro Cubans was talking about George H.W Bush. George H.W Bush was a CIA official in 1963 who supervised the Anti-Castro Cubans, and working under Richard Bissell, while working alongside E. Howard Hunt and Frank Sturgis, both of whom would be part of the JFK assassins team. Bush and Hunt were particularly tight. After all, Nixon brought them both into his administration. One may remember that Hunt got jailed and was demanding that Nixon pay him 1 million dollars or he would talk. Nixon indeed payed him, but through someone else. Hunt was paid by Bill Liedtke, the oldest business partner of George H.W Bush, who helped Bush found Zapata Offshore. The checks were written by Ramon Rodriguez, a CIA-trained money launderer working in a Mexican bank. When George H.W Bush was Vice President, he sent a man named Felix Rodriguez (An Anti-Castro Cuban who had worked for the CIA's Operation 40) to get Ramon to pay for Bush's wars.

 

So, George H.W Bush worked with Hunt in Anti-Castro CIA operations, Bush and Hunt were both in the White House with Nixon, Bush's father's closest business associate (Averell Harriman) was Hunt's boss, and Bush's oldest business partner gave Hunt his $1,000,000 in hush money. It would seem that George H.W Bush is closely connected with E. Howard Hunt, who was part of the assassins team and a probable candidate for the actual killer.

 

William Colby was fired from the CIA and replaced by George H.W Bush, who could be trusted not to investigate the assassination. This is more evidence that George H.W Bush was CIA before he became the director. Bush had to have had experience to be suddenly appointed to such a position.

 

Here's a strange connection.. Oswald's close friend, George De Mohrenschildt (some researchers think he was Oswald's controller), who was connected to the CIA, helped him get a job at the Texas School Book Depository. The night before the Senate Committee wanted to question him, his head was blown off. Many researchers have raised their eyebrows high at the fact that Mohrenschildt had George H.W Bush's name, nickname, address, and company in his address book.

 

More evidence comes from FBI memos dated the day of the assassination that stated that George H.W Bush made a phone call where he stated that he had heard in the weeks leading up to the assassination that one "James Parrott" had been planning to assassinate John F. Kennedy. When questioned about this, Bush said that he didn't remember making the comment. That's amazing. How could he not remember making a call that implicated someone in the assassination? It seems that, like Nixon and Hunt, George Bush just 'can't remember what he was doing that day'.

 

Time to go over the evidence against George H.W Bush:

 

-George H.W Bush is connected, through his father and through Skull and Bones, to a Nazi-connected clique of powerful men. The Rockefellers, Fords, Harrimans, and his father, Prescott Bush, appear to be at the top of this network. George's father, Prescott Bush, and Prescott's closest business partner, Averell Harriman (And Averell's brother Roland) made a fortune off of the Second World War by funding Hitler. George H.W Bush's membership in this clique connects him to E. Howard Hunt, the likely shooter of JFK, who worked for Averell Harriman in Paris before joining the CIA. It also connects him to Allen Dulles, who was one of the main perps involved in the assassination. It also connects him to Richard Bissell, who was directing operations for the Bay of Pigs. It seems that George H.W Bush's membership in the clique connects him to many JFK assassination perps.

 

-A released memo stated that George Bush was in the CIA as a supervisor of the Anti-Castro Cubans, which were deeply linked to the JFK assassination. Tons of evidence shows that George H.W Bush was, indeed, in the CIA at this time and was working with JFK assassins E. Howard Hunt and Frank Sturgis, as well as the Anti-Castro Cubans.

 

-George H.W Bush has very close ties to E. Howard Hunt. He worked with Hunt during the preparations for the Bay of Pigs, his father's closest business partner paid Hunt $1,000,000 in hush money, he worked in the Nixon administration with Hunt, and his oldest business partner (Bill Liedtke) paid Hunt's hush money. Seeing as E. Howard Hunt was one of the shooters and the likely assassin, this is extremely significant.

 

-George Bush was in contact with Oswald's CIA 'friend'.

 

Now, this brings us to our final point.. We have exposed a Nazi-linked clique of Kennedy killers. It involves Prescott Bush, the Harriman Brothers, the Rockefellers, the Fords, George H.W Bush, Allen Dulles, Richard Nixon, Richard Bissell, E. Howard Hunt, Jack Ruby, and other criminals.

 

Now, we look at George W. Bush.. the son of George H.W Bush and the current President of the United States. Is he in this clique? Yes. He, like his father and grandfather, was a member of Skull & Bones. He also finished what his daddy started in Iraq. Most interesting is George W. Bush's involvement in the assassination of JFK's son, JFK Jr. It would seem that while Bush Sr. directed the assassination of JFK Sr., Bush Jr. organized the "airplane accident" of JFK Jr.. Get this. The day JFK Jr.'s plane crashed for no apparent reason, George W. Bush went missing. He stayed missing for three days. No one on his staff knew where he was. Where was he?

 

And, what about 9-11? George W. Bush, a clique member, was President of the US at the time of the September 11 attacks. It was these attacks that allowed him to both go into Iraq/Afghanistan and create a security crackdown on the US. Was the clique responsible for 9-11? Was 9-11 an INSIDE JOB?

 

-Why did the air force fail to intercept ANY of the four airplanes involved in the attacks when interceptions are routine?

 

-How was it possible for the Pentagon, the most well-defended military building in the world, to be struck by a jetliner 30 minutes after everyone knew 'America was under attack'? Why was it not protected?

 

-Why was no official in government, military, intelligence, or FAA ever disciplined after the biggest intelligence and air response failure in American history?

 

-Why did Building 7, which was across the street from the Twin Towers, suddenly collapse on 9-11 at 5:30?

 

-What caused the explosions inside the World Trade Center after the two 'plane' hits? These explosions were caught on tape and reported by hundreds of witnesses. Were they caused by pre-placed explosives?

 

-Is it just a spectacular coincidence that up to 9 war games were being run by the US military on the morning of 9-11 that simulated hijackings, terrorist attacks, and airplanes crashing into buildings?

 

-Why did George Bush stay reading in a Florida school 11 minutes after he was informed that America was under attack by airplanes? Everyone knew where he was and there was an international airport four miles away, so the school was a probable target in the case of a 'real' terrorist hijacking attack.. so why didn't the secret service evacuate the school? Is it because Bush's top staff 'knew' that the school was not a target?

 

It seems that the clique behind the JFK assassination continues to control the US government, and carried out the September 11 attacks to further their agenda. Researchers have definitively linked them to both the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center and the Oklahoma City Bombing. It seems that a criminal clique is running rampant inside the United States. It has and will kill American citizens to further it's agenda. At the top of this clique is the elite families of America (Rockefeller, Ford, Harriman), the Bushes, the Skull & Bones Society, and the members of elite secret societies such as the CFR, Trilateral Commission, and Bilderberg Group. The most powerful 'clique' family in America appears to be the Rockefellers. This clique is controlling America and trying to get it's global government agenda through. Only an educated public can defeat this malicious syndicate of families, organizations, and individuals.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

It is the final word, in my opinion. The strongest evidence of a conspiracy all bunched together. The assassination explained.

 

And, in my opinion, it is nothing more than yet another amachure "documentary" -and I use that term in the loosest possible way- that tries to dis-prove history. If there was any reasonable explanation of a conspiracy it would be front-page news throughout the world - or do you claim that everyone at every news agency is involved in the alleged "cover-up?"

[DownWithTheIlluminati]

It is the final word, in my opinion. The strongest evidence of a conspiracy all bunched together. The assassination explained.

 

And, in my opinion, it is nothing more than yet another amachure "documentary" -and I use that term in the loosest possible way- that tries to dis-prove history. If there was any reasonable explanation of a conspiracy it would be front-page news throughout the world - or do you claim that everyone at every news agency is involved in the alleged "cover-up?"

 

[edited by SteveThaiBinh to remove personal insult]

 

1. What do you base 'your opinion' on? Have you even watched JFK II? If so, point out actual problems with the movie. ""documentary" -and I use that term in the loosest possible way"? God, I hope you've watched it (for your sake), because if you haven't watched it, then you have just made quite the fool out of yourself for giving such strong criticism to a movie you've never watched. If you have watched it, then start producing some evidence.

 

2. "Dis-prove history"? History has been changed many times and is still debated! Stop trying to act like some kind of offense is being made when someone argues their own point of view on the event. I guess anyone who says that the Iraq war was bad will be accused of trying to "dis-prove history" 40 years from now.

 

3. There is a reason the news constantly lies about the assassination.. do some research on all the major news agencies. CNN, NBC, CBS, FOX, you name it. They are all run by corporations. The news is not honest. It's a propaganda machine that is used by the criminals that killed JFK to cover up crimes like JFK, RFK, 9-11, 7-7, and other crimes. If you trust those guys, you'll never get far in this war of information. Watch this video to understand how the news agencies are simply deceiving us with propaganda: http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=aac6KmdycsI

 

4. "Alleged"? Sorry, the cover up is not 'alleged'. It is thoroughly documented through the intimidation of witnesses, documentary evidence, and the accounts of people who were inside the plot itself (Jack Ruby, Chauncey Holt, E. Howard Hunt).

 

5. Why would the silence of the news require "everyone at every news agency" to be involved? A reporter doesn't report what they want. They are given what to report and if the big boys don't like something they report, the story is pulled. That's how the world of mainstream media works. The people at the top, which is very few, run everything, and yes, all of the people at the top of the news are 'in on it'. They're folks with agendas and they are put in place to control the flow of public information.

 

6. There have been news agencies that have covered the JFK conspiracy. Rolling Stone covered a CONFESSION from E. Howard Hunt: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story...ward_hunt/print

 

I suppose, though, that we should dismiss E. Howard Hunt, who is documented to have been in the CIA at the time, and was even paid $1,000,000 by an associate of George H.W Bush to keep quiet while he was in jail, on the grounds that he's "trying to dis-prove history".

 

So, all of the Grassy Knoll witnesses are liars, all of the witnesses who said they were intimidated are liars, Marita Lorenz is a liar, Perry Russo is a liar, E. Howard Hunt is a liar, Chauncey Holt is a liar, every other person who has come public in saying that they were involved is a liar, all of the doctors in Dallas who examined Kennedy's body (and saw a large EXIT WOUND in the BACK of Kennedy's head) are liars. That's what people who believe the Warren fairytale need to believe.

 

CIA: They are all liars. Yep, all of them. Every Dallas doctor, every one of the 35 Grassy Knoll witnesses, and every one of the many whistleblowers are all liars. By the way, I have a bridge on the moon that I could get you for an amazing price! :lol:

 

There is no "Conspiracy Nut" in the JFK case. After all the evidence that has come out after 45 years, anyone who still hasn't figured out that the JFK assassination was a conspiracy is an "Anti-Conspiracy" Nut who refuses to see reality. Some have been fooled by deceptive writers such as Gerard Posner or Vincent Bugliosi, while others are just governmenthuggers who support the Iraq War and believes that it is impossible for the government to lie.

[Gorgon]

You made a new account just to post in one thread.

 

...

[SteveThaiBinh]

I really hope this thread can remain open and be a place where conspiracies are discussed in an intelligent and respectful manner. If this doesn't happen, we will of course close it.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

What do you base 'your opinion' on?

 

Not fiction and fantasy, that's for sure.

 

Have you even watched JFK II?

 

Yes, unfortunately I did waste my time with that "film."

 

If so, point out actual problems with the movie.

 

If I were to try to do that I might as well respond to the entire film, so much of it is pure conjecture or complete and utter fabrication.

 

History has been changed many times and is still debated!

 

Some parts of history are debated, but the J.F.K. assassination is not one of those items - at least not among creditable historians.

 

There is a reason the news constantly lies about the assassination.. do some research on all the major news agencies. CNN, NBC, CBS, FOX, you name it. They are all run by corporations. The news is not honest.

 

"Major news agencies," and why do you assume I get most of my news from CNN, NBC, CBS, etc., what about things such as NPR - is that run by one of the "corporations" or are you trying to inflate your case?

 

It's a propaganda machine that is used by the criminals that killed JFK to cover up crimes like JFK, RFK, 9-11, 7-7, and other crimes.

 

Ok, you just made a claim that you now need to support if you want others to believe it. If you cannot provide evidence other than a few Internet videos, I would not expect anyone to take you very seriously.

 

"Alleged"? Sorry, the cover up is not 'alleged'. It is thoroughly documented through the intimidation of witnesses, documentary evidence, and the accounts of people who were inside the plot itself (Jack Ruby, Chauncey Holt, E. Howard Hunt).

 

Then why cannot you produce any of it? If there is so much, quote, "thoroughly documented" evidence then why cannot you come up with it?

 

There have been news agencies that have covered the JFK conspiracy. Rolling Stone covered a CONFESSION from E. Howard Hunt: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story...ward_hunt/print

 

I guess you ignored this part: "There is no way to confirm Hunt's allegations -- all but one of the co-conspirators he named are long gone."

 

 

After all the evidence that has come out after 45 years, anyone who still hasn't figured out that the JFK assassination was a conspiracy is an "Anti-Conspiracy" Nut who refuses to see reality.

 

Either that or they simply do not think that those who put forth conpriseis have proven their case(s).

[DownWithTheIlluminati]

Not fiction and fantasy, that's for sure.

 

That was taken out of context. I was referring to your opinion on the film. Unless you can provide evidence against the information compiled in the film, then your criticism remains baseless. Got a point-by-point critique of the film for me?

 

Yes, unfortunately I did waste my time with that "film."

 

Film

a. A movie.

b. Movies considered as a group.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/film

 

Sorry, there's no debate on whether JFK II is a film or not. Even if you think it's poorly done, it's still a film. "Big Top Peewee" is one of the worst movies ever made, but regardless, it must be acknowledged as a film.

 

If I were to try to do that I might as well respond to the entire film, so much of it is pure conjecture or complete and utter fabrication.

 

Evidence?

 

Some parts of history are debated, but the J.F.K. assassination is not one of those items - at least not among creditable historians.

 

It is debated by experts though. On the subject of an event like the JFK assassination, I would trust experts on forensics and eyewitnesses more than "credible historians". After all, many historians are simply relaying the information that is already out there. The better ones interpret the evidence for themselves (which causes debate), but any who dare challenge the Warren Commission are deemed "not credible". Don't let "credible historians" decide everything for you instead of looking at the evidence for yourself.

 

"Major news agencies," and why do you assume I get most of my news from CNN, NBC, CBS, etc., what about things such as NPR - is that run by one of the "corporations" or are you trying to inflate your case?

 

The President of NPR worked as an editor and reporter for The Washington Post for 25 years. The CEO and Chairman of the Washington Post is Donald E. Graham, who attends the meetings of the Bilderberg Group. As you can see, all roads lead back to the mainstream media. The mainstream media is dominated by corporations and members of groups such as the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Trilateral Commission, and the Bilderberg Group, all of which are forces for the global agenda.

 

Ok, you just made a claim that you now need to support if you want others to believe it. If you cannot provide evidence other than a few Internet videos, I would not expect anyone to take you very seriously.

 

It is not reasonable to dismiss the information in my video simply because it is on the Internet. Did you watch the entire video? It explains things quite well, in my opinion. If you want evidence that the media lies, let's look at an example from the JFK assassination. Dan Rather, a well-known reporter for CBS, got to see the Zapruder film before anyone else did. He stated that the film shows Kennedy's head going forward with 'considerable violence'. Anyone who has watched the video knows that to be untrue. We are left with two possibilities. The first is that he is lying about seeing the video and simply reading what the officials are saying about a shot from behind. The second is that he saw the video, but is lying about it's contents. Hear him fibbing to America: http://jfkmurdersolved.com/film/rather4.wav

 

Then why cannot you produce any of it? If there is so much, quote, "thoroughly documented" evidence then why cannot you come up with it?

 

Sure. What would you like evidence for?

 

I guess you ignored this part: "There is no way to confirm Hunt's allegations -- all but one of the co-conspirators he named are long gone."

 

So? They aren't making a hit piece and definitively saying it's untrue. So, what do you think? Is Hunt a liar too? Unlike other whistleblowers, his background is well-known and we know that he worked for Nixon and the CIA. He was one of the Watergate burglars. We know he was involved in covert, unlawful operations with the US government, based on his involvement in Watergate. We know that while he was in jail, he told the press that he was a CIA assassin and said to Nixon that if he did not give him $1,000,000, he would 'tell all' about the Kennedy assassination. Hunt got his money from one of George H.W Bush's close associates. Nixon also ordered the FBI to stop investigating Hunt, and got resigned for it. Why did Nixon take it this seriously if Hunt was a liar?

 

Either that or they simply do not think that those who put forth conpriseis have proven their case(s).

 

Well, try me. What would you like evidence for? I can provide plenty of evidence that the JFK assassination was a conspiracy.

[Trenitay]

So are you saying that all media is lying? And that everyone who SAYS they are an eyewitness, everyone who SAYS they were threatened is telling the truth? I'm not sure I can believe that without all your evidence.

[DownWithTheIlluminati]

So are you saying that all media is lying? And that everyone who SAYS they are an eyewitness, everyone who SAYS they were threatened is telling the truth? I'm not sure I can believe that without all your evidence.

 

The mainstream media is lying, yes. The mainstream networks are dominated by members of secret societies such as the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Trilateral Commission, and the Bilderberg Group.

 

There are tons of on-the-record witness accounts of people who saw the shots come from the Grassy Knoll. Mark Lane talked to many people in Dallas and they told him where they saw the shots come from. Also, all the doctors in Dallas unanimously described a large exit wound in the back of Kennedy's head. I don't believe everyone, but to say that all these witnesses and doctors and whistleblowers are all lying.

[DeathScepter]

regardless of secret societies, I do think The Media is full of **** because they are interested in the money.

 

 

 

This is an very interesting thread.

[Trenitay]

Im just not sure about that. The media may lie sometimes but how can you be sure when. How can you be sure that the "witnesses" aren't lying?

[Walsingham]

I agree. Even lone individuals have agendas, supporting their own psychological order and 'ruling memes'.

[taks]

Im just not sure about that. The media may lie sometimes but how can you be sure when. How can you be sure that the "witnesses" aren't lying?

a bigger problem with the media, IMO, is not lying but lack of qualification. most journalists do not have the requisite background to follow-up on the areas they cover.

 

btw, it is easy to find circumstantial links between just about anybody with power. the pool of powerful people in this country is small, very small. john kerry, for example, is also a bonesman. if one wanted to find a link between him and JFK, it probably wouldn't be too difficult. the kennedy family is hardly devoid of shady dealings, either.

 

taks