The foolishness of the Ukraine crisis in Europe, with a possible solution

“There is no honourable way to kill, no gentle way to destroy. There is nothing good in war. Except it’s ending.” – Abraham Lincoln.

Ordinary citizens in both Europe, Ukraine and Russia don’t want war. It’s rarely that people want war. Propaganda, however, can accelerate sentiments in different and sometimes sinister ways, as often shown in history.

But not rarely, there was a hefty price to pay. The combination of propaganda and ignorance is a dangerous one, because propaganda rarely covers the truth.

There is gross injustice by sending people to war for “a lie”. But the lie can be wrapped and presented in convincing ways through the falsehood of savvy propaganda. Super powers are well able to convince their citizens that they are standing on the right side of history, but rarely they tell the full truth.

The pretext for war in Iraq and Afghanistan through 9/11, was smartly crafted and many secrets in this area will never enter the  public domain. Likewise the assassination of an American President as part of various complexities in history an earlier time,  has been carefully hidden from the public eye, and still is. 

But Russia and the previous Soviet Union has it’s history as well. Likewise various other countries.

The reality which counts is that wars are made through decisions of government leaders and their military commanders. Propaganda and lobbying are often tools to get people in line. War has obviously still a place in history but the risks are higher and leaders need to surf the waves of wisdom to keep on top and prevent drowning or burning themselves. There is little which ordinary people can do to defy this reality we have to live with, still hoping that leaders may change their perceptions, their agenda for the better, rather than losing their mind for the worst in a less than savvy war. It’s a matter of mercy, more than justice. The so-called justice for one perspective is not the justice of combined perspectives.

Mercy is the power of people to decide on the common good in people and groups and nations and to create the best possible solution in a controversial scenario. However, it often does not work that way, and sometimes even people get killed because they tried to end war. 

When you can’t pay e.g. the rent for 3 months because you got a broken leg and can’t work, by law you can be evicted from your house and your family can find themselves homeless. After all you signed a lease contact. Mercy is when the landlord allows you to stay in the house until you are recovered and make up for his lost income when you find a new job. In the meantime, however. your kids can play with fire by night and find the house and everyone dead by day. They screwed up the 2nd lease, being allowed. 

Like this are some leaders in Europe and NATO in this generation. They play with fire by night and may lose the second lease on peace, provided after the Second World War and after the fall of the Soviet Empire. This is what happens at the moment in and around Ukraine.

Neither the people of Ukraine, nor the people of Russia, Europe and the US are bad at large,-  though their governments have the instruments and the power of decision making, to carry out propaganda guided misery, implemented by people who are trained to follow orders and do terrible things. Once war breaks out there is a domino effect on evil because the veil of civilisation is thin and can only be protected by abiding to international law, however with mercy in particular scenarios. 

People are not made for war. When they are sent to fight wars they often come back with PTSD because of the gruesome manifestations of war. People are by nature not often evil, but war can make them both numb and evil through the limits of human compassion on the battle field. The battle field knows neither mercy nor justice. The battle field has its own rules. 

There are still scholars who are intelligently ( and religiously) defending and framing either the Russian system – or the system being used by the US or China. And they can be very convincing for either country. Those countries are very powerful, in different ways. And the propaganda tool to create “the enemy picture” is easily and smartly crafted. Clever but not always wise. No system is that bad that it includes the people of a country as a whole. But propaganda resonates with not always the better instincts of people. When passion meets aggression there is no mercy anymore. When passion meets mercy, wisdom will prevail.   Hence mercy being better than the proclaimed justice of war and the announced wisdom to prepare for this by countries who don’t see the implications of their actions and gamble with the lives of others. 

Regarding Ukraine, what does Russia want?

It is actually more about what Russia doesn’t want. Russia does not want Ukraine in the NATO, and they don’t want any NATO exercises near Russia’s border.

Is that a bad thing? 

No,  I don’t think so. 

It’s a legitimate request based on their own history perhaps and at least their sense of security being compromised. 

If Ukraine would potentially become a NATO State, there could be nuclear missile systems just on the border with Russia. This is a red line for Russia and Russia did not get any reassurances from the West.

Russia did prepare an army to stand ready for a potential invasion of Ukraine. That might well have been the intention, but it did not happen. Meanwhile the US and NATO are preparing a build-up of an army in Eastern Europe close to the borders of Russia.

What is or might be required?

Relaxation of international tensions in Europe on the Ukraine conflict…obviously, through de-escalation and a reasonable agreement.

What could this be?

Let’s rethink for a moment the potential NATO status for Ukraine in favour of a “strict neutrality status” for Ukraine.

This could indeed prevent the prospect of a scenario which could potentially become the “killing fields of Ukraine”, with -perhaps – parts of Europe being involved. The sentiments run very deep in Ukraine. And a regional war in Europe is possible with unknown implications and destruction.

Think of Ukraine as “a neutral State” ( like e.g. Switzerland), keeping as such its independence , – however at the same time Ukraine neither being a NATO State at the disadvantage of Russia, – nor being a “Russian dictated buffer State” at the disadvantage of Ukraine itself. Ukraine will keep this way its independence and can be a prosperous nation, when it changes a deep-rooted culture of internal corruption. The alternative could be destruction of the Ukraine as a country, whilst other countries are busy to try to keep out and fixing “the blame game”.

NATO’s purpose is to defend the freedom and security of its members. By increasingly encroaching on Russian borders by making former Soviet members NATO States, – Europe and the US have been ongoing and moderately provoking Russia, – and this is the cause for Ukraine being a disputed zone in Europe at present. Russia is as such responding to an issue more or less created by NATO and the US. For Russia potential NATO membership for Ukraine is a no-go zone and a red line and they are prepared to prevent this happening at considerable cost. China meanwhile supports Russia to stop expansion of NATO in Europe.

If America seriously addresses Russia’s security concerns (genuinely), and stops NATO to consider and implement membership for Ukraine within the NATO alliance, – a peaceful resolution is “entirely possible,” says former US State Department adviser James Carden. This is the only real requirement. Actually, NATO till so far never seriously contemplated to take Ukraine on as a member on board.

Strict “Neutrality status” for Ukraine under supervision of the UN would be the way out of a bizarre conflict with neither justice nor mercy. But this concept is based on both mercy and justice for all parties who are not willing to risk of a merciless war without justice.

What happens if Russia invades Ukraine?

Western nations are supporting Ukraine, but some responses have been tougher than others. The US and UK have supplied weapons, while Germany plans to send medical support next month but will not supply military equipment.

China supports Russia in stopping NATO extending more to Russian borders and we have to wait and see how this works out.

There has been much talk about sanctions aimed at punishing Moscow. Publicly, the US and European allies are aiming to hit Russia financially like never before if Putin does invade Ukraine. There are calls to cut Russia out of the SWIFT financial system, which moves money from bank to bank around the world. This would be one of the most damaging financial steps they could take, to destruct Russia’s economy immediately and long term. This could isolate Russia from most international financial transactions, including international profits from oil and gas production, which counts for about 40 percent of its revenue. The US considers as well blocking Russia from access to the US dollar, if Russia invades Ukraine.

In the meantime, two superpowers are facing each other fully military equipped over the borders of Ukraine with the US accelerating the risk of a major and potentially escalating conflict, rather than offering a peaceful resolution – and a way out – based on what Russia does not want. And this is simply no NATO membership for Ukraine, that’s all.

The US may think there is justice to punish Russia for meddling in US elections and this is what President Biden promised. But the way he shows power in Europe, without “a way out”, might not be that merciful for the whole of Europe whilst a neutrality status for Ukraine is based on both reason and mercy at a critical time. Mercy for the people of Ukraine, Russia and Europe -and others perhaps – who don’t want a major war, not again.

Group bias for the European partners with the US might be an issue, like group bias is an issue for the Republican Party in the US at the moment, who formally declared the insurrection last year on the 6th of January as “a legitimate political discourse”. Group bias can be a dangerous when people stop thinking for themselves.

Former President Trump once proclaimed the US is “a deeply stupid country”. That’s not true for the majority of the Americans, but if the US is unable to create an enduring peace between European nations and Russia, and escalates tension rather than de-escalate tension in Europe, we may add to the existing list that World War 2 was a victory for both the US and it’s allies, including Russia, but: that both the 3rd European war, the Iraq war, the Afghanistan war and the Vietnam war were deliberate and avoidable and failed wars, at the cost of many.

People who nowadays want war or take the risk on an international escalating conflict, don’t know what war will be.

Hence better to get back to the negotiating table and sign up for Ukraine being a neutral independent state, with neither NATO nor Russian involvement to extend each their territories. Aiming for extending territories is fruitless and mindless business.

The power of choice, with wisdom, based on mercy, lies in grace under pressure. In other words – regarding war: prevention is simply better than cure. And in the crisis of Ukraine it could be that simple…

Thank you.

Paul  Wolf

You CAN’T refuse this 2016 offer , – CAN YOU ??‏

I will make you an offer you can’t  refuse” ― Mario Puzo.

–

The Godfather Part III,

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 

You can’t refuse this 2016 offer  , -can YOU ??

–

No, — not the offer as shown in the Godfather by Michael Corleone or by his father!!.. .We may remember this master of drama and art, The Godfather:  a  genius mafia/crime film by Francis Ford Coppola  in the 70ties and 90 ties… Many of us have seen this, either in the cinema or on TV or on DVD…

–

However, what does it benefit a man when he gains the world and loses his soul? That is the question being raised.. After killing all his enemies who betrayed him, Michael Corleone died as a lost man, full of guilt. He wanted his family out of the Mafia scene, but one revenge did lead to the other and in a last attempt, sucked in again, after losing his first wife, his second wife,- he finally lost his beloved daughter Mary. The last played by Sofia Coppola.

–

It’s a drama with similarities in some families, communities, countries and even the world. The world where, at times,  we keep our enemies close. To destroy them when we seek our chance.

–

The hypocrisy is everywhere and the menace of violence almost anywhere.

———————————————-

Just one comment was interesting, when an US Senator visited the Corleone family:

Senator Pat Geary: I despise your masquerade, the dishonest way you pose yourself. You and your whole fucking family…Michael Corleone:  We’re both part of the same hypocrisy, Senator, but never think it applies to my family…

———————————————-

See the film yourself if you haven’t seen it, as it is not the subject today.

–

It may however illustrate something. We can win the world but lose our soul. We can  howbeit take part in the drama of this world as actors. Actors who have the chance to rehearse well before our actions, or go down the hill as failed culprits due to the disease of dedicated negligence and failure to get our act together. An act which can be played out differently than some Shakespearean drama’s. Different than some drama’s on this planet at present, where evil indeed needs to be destructed, and where we have to play a part at home and in our communities. But you know, for all this,  education is the key. Not only the education for a trade or whatever you name it, but the education on the greater needs for humanity. And the last is the deeper learning. The learning we have to do in sustained ways, often the learning at the centre of our heart.

–

–

I will do you an offer you can’t refuse. It’s a different one, a greater one. It’s an offer where nothing is too big, no distance too great.

–

Time can’t stand in its way and there is no obstacle it can’t overcome. And you  don’t even need to go to the movie for this, as you can make the movie play in your own brain, in your own heart.

In your own soul, if you wish. In that particular spot where there is no distance or barriers or obstacles. 

–

You know, ..nobody can take this away from you! In this area lies your greatest freedom. And with this freedom you may get at times both the weirdest, – but also the greatest revelations at night during your dreams.

–

You know – but this aside – that only a tiny fraction of our brains is used? ..That our reserve capacity being not used is far greater than what can be applied at the moment… Are we able to explore this reserve capacity with a view to a better state of humanity?

–

If the desire for this is huge, indeed no distance is too big or any barriers too large. The last when the dream (your dream!) is amazing. The last when  the wanting for all this is stunning and the love and gratitude for the movie in your own mind astounding… But you need to allow it happening!.. YOU need to allow this happening in your whole body mind and spirit.

–

Does that make sense?

–

–

Look, Michael Corleone pictured the world as he wanted it in his mind, he laid the foundation like his father did. The desire went on and on in his mind, and so did the killings, – master minded, breathtaking and awful. When we allow the good stuff going on and on in our mind, allow the dreams which never were, repeating itself time after time and day after day, we can come up with something far better.

–

We can achieve  together more than on our own. And then: together we can do better at home, at work  and at the stage show of this world. And in our country, or in our community!

–

An offer you can’t refuse, isn’t it?.. Sounds attractive isn’t it?

–

What do you think?

–

–

If we want to live and lead a better life we need to create  a sense of hope, a sense of excitement and confidence. A sense of achievement as such as well. And all this starts in our own mind, if we allow it happening, if we allow our creativity being guided by what we feel is hope . By what we feel is real excitement and achievement. Creating 

authentic confidence for ourselves.

–

Sounds easy isn’t it?

–

Not that easy for most of us as we may feel trapped as Michael Corleone felt trapped through the culture of his family and the expectations perhaps, but we have a free will, trapped as we can be at times.

–

Imprisoned as we may feel at times.

–

–

However, in our spirit we may feel without fear. And we may play without stress in the movie we create ourselves in our own being, in our inspiration. It is  then what we may even feel into our bones, where moreover we feel this in our spirit, – where we likewise believe it…

–

Where we shall hold this close to our heart. So good as it can be!

–

An offer you can’t refuse, an offer which makes or breaks us in the way we deal with it. Which makes or breaks us in the way we live.

–

Deal with it, live with it, –  in reverberating leadership both to ourselves where it affects our aims, where we have to be proactive and not refrain from the action we need to take. But as a result as well, – all this to the people on which we may have a positive impact, the people we love both at home and in the world. It applies as well to the people even who drive us “nuts”. But also to the people we may despise of what they inflict.

–

–
So what do we need to do??

–

What we have to do is to lead, to invent and to guide. To lead , to invent ,  and to guide . Why? .. Because it sounds good and as it is good. Because if you focus on results you will not make a difference, but if you focus on a moving change you will get results, as long it is related with the right goals. As long it is related with the right issues and the right things in our day-to-day life, as this is what matters.

–

This is what matters most. And if I say what matters most , this is  perhaps for all of us what matters most. You know, our kids are eaten up by criminal syndicates who bring in larger proportions drugs in our country. Not drugs which are enjoyable but drugs which make the mind screwed. It kills people like bullets kill people. And one may say it does not affect me in person,  but it happens almost right at our doorstep, right in our street or neighborhood, – where people are getting killed that way. People get so screwed in their brains that they are unable to learn anymore. I don’t mean the academic stuff, but the learning from the heart and how we have to relate to each other.

–

You know, some die slowly, over years… Some die instantly, in seconds… And the worst thing perhaps is when the spirit dies when people are alive, as those people may get very dangerous and intolerant to others. Like extremism, like terror and others.

–

And every time when a human being dies, a human being with a good intend,  there is taken away something from his or her family as well.

–

When people die , there is likewise taken away something from their community. And if it is eg a President killed by a bullet, something as well is taken away from the country, – apart from his or her family, apart from his or her community.

–

The fragile tapestry of families, communities, and countries are hanging in the balance if no  greater force is going to stop  today’s youngsters being eaten up through the evil of drug dealing and trafficking… The evil of people smuggling and paedophile networks. The evil  of sex trafficking, –  or soldier trafficking with  kids in wars… we can’t comprehend they exist.

–

–

We can’t comprehend they exist!

–

True?

–

This is on offer, still,  in our world and far more… Yes?.. And you can refuse this, isn’t it? 

–

For sure we are not in control about all this,.But what I mean is you can refuse to take part in the nasty stuff which  is invading our culture. Increasingly invading our civilization if we don’t keep close watch… Including, also, – the risk of growing racism and accelerating intolerance as we see this happening again… What we see in the film like “The Godfather” is that violence breeds more violence and we don’t need to look at movies to detect that our world is full of it, – and sometimes very subtle.

–

Even there where we live.

–

At the end of the day God made us from the same substance, and it has never been the aim to allow the slow destruction of this vulnerable and mortal fabric of life, – by war or hunger, by climate change or any other …self-inflicted evil perhaps.

–

We live in a time where this tapestry of life, painfully and clumsily woven at times, is getting more endangered than ever before. We are living in a time where neo-fascism may flare up in countries where we don’t expect this at the moment.

–

A time where violence is rising and common humanity is ignored.

–

We see civilian slaughter in far-off lands. People of all shades of sanity may acquire knives or guns whilst the ignorance and misunderstanding is increasing, – and the barriers for violence reduced.. We  see domestic violence on the increase, likewise the institutional violence in churches and in schools.

–

The indifference and slow decay…you know.

–

Do you know?

–

I have no answers on all this and this is not the aim. The aim is more to accept in our own selves the offer we can’t escape. And this is to look privately  what we can do. Which means not to teach to hate and to fear. Which means eg not to judge people on their colour or beliefs. Which means as well not to threaten the freedom of others, if they don’t threaten you.

–

–

Each country has unalike  hardships and different aims, ideals if any, – made or designed by the traditions of their history and the level of understanding of their times. It is however not about the diversity of our goals but the closeness we have in our desires, our struggles and hope for the future. The youngsters of this world whose minds are neither screwed up by drugs, – or by emotional and/or sexual abuse. You know, they have a clear awareness what is at stake. But also those who suffer with clear minds. Sometimes in their sleep , as Aeschylus once wrote differently, falls bit by bit the agony on their hearts, –  and in despair against their will may arise, wisdom through the amazing grace of God.

–

Some people are more aware of this than others, which is fine..

–

Yes, young people with the right sensitivity, likewise adults with the right responsiveness, know that law enforcement has to tear down crime syndicates dealing with drugs, sex trafficking etc., to save the younger generation and their sanity. They are aware as well that we neither can tolerate climate change by non-activity, nor the intolerance of  those who are violent extremists or racists.

–

If we allow all this, all what we see already, – we allow our heart to be fooled. We allow humanity bending down the wrong direction, we are crippling the ability of our kids to do the serious lifting when they are adults. Why?  Because the ability to learn from humanity in sustained ways has been lost by the ignorance of our time .

–

I am going to finalise this story. But remember, – it’s fun to see light and we better live in the light than in darkness.

–

Embracing normal human rights where those  rights are an obligation to protect, will ensure that the flag of liberty and freedom keeps flying. A flag with the colours of true responsibility as well.

–

As this is light.

–

Responsibility to make the right and many forward moving decisions.

–

As this is light.

–

–

So, which moving forward decisions are we going to make in 2016 now at the end of this year?  Is this a question you can refuse to ask yourself?  Is this an offer and an obligation you can decline? ..An obligation amidst  the injustices everywhere and anywhere?

–

John F Kennedy once said: “Lets go for the Moon”. Lets go for it…And true, less than 9 years after his assassination Neil Armstrong became the first to step on the Moon. Don’t forget the tremendous team effort!!

–

I would say: Lets continue to go for this planet, let’s go for ourselves and our own enlargement in person and spirit, – that we may shine as the Moon shines,- under the light of the Sun.

–

As this is light.

–

Lets go for the questions which part or which one is our own domain of care, which we can share. Which we can improve.

–

You know, devoted hearts are never a waste, – and walking with destiny, with passion for all of this, – can be a grace.

–

As this is light.

–

–

Those things are told so that you may have harmony and encouragement this pending New Year. A year with grave concerns pending again. But it will not be the settlement of the grave or being the slave of a poor mind or conscious, – but the goodwill and the type of mindfulness which brings the present to the future.

–

As this is light.

–

A future where  we can respond with wisdom and kindness, rather than habit and reactivity.

–

A deal  you can’t refuse, isn’t it?

–

So let’s find first the final justice in ourselves, – and bring it out in both words and silence,  in both action and not acting. The last e.g . when not acting or responding to insults is the best way to do.

–

As this is light.

–

Are we able to refuse this?

–

Are we able to refuse to try to make both more gentle  the lives of others and ourselves?

–

Do we have a better bargain perhaps than this?

–

As the actor Al Pacino in his role of Michael Corleone once said,  and I translate it the way as I see: we are all part of the same hypocrisy if for the sake of unity in ourselves we turn a blind eye on what is going on around us and in this world. That is not mindfulness, that is duplicity. The same hypocrisy as shown at many levels in society. The same deception often found at organizational levels of many political and even sacred institutions and foundations. We know this, we see this. “It is easy to fool the eye, but it is hard to fool the heart…”

–

When evil men and powers plot, fine people must design and organize.

–

As this is light.

–

When  evil men and powers bomb and burn and take the life out of our kids, good men should raise and bind.

–

As this is light.

–

When  evil groups or men shout repugnant or sickening words, – great people  must undertake the splendour of real connections and affection.

–

As this is real light.

–

Our lifetime is too short and the endeavours are too great, –  and so we too have to make sure, within our domain of care, to let our best possible qualities flourish and to show our best possible courage and determination. The remedy lies in our own soul and if trillions of energies and daring are combined this way on this globe, we can say: We can change the world a little bit, in our strong connections in which we face the future. We can change the high tide of insanity for a high tide in humanity.

–

As this is the best light.

–

This is the offer we can’t refuse, isn’t it?

–

And  with this in mind, – I  wish you all an awesome 2016 , and more than this, – even better than this! .. Just embrace the future as a never ending story with everything you have, to make more gentle this generation and future generations!!!

–

As this is the best possible light!

–

–

–

Thank you so much!

–

 Paul 

–
Paul Alexander Wolf

–

More results from wordpress.com »

–

Challenges of our times and generation

–

https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2015/12/14/words-matter-the-world-matters%e2%80%8f-hope-matters-likewise-your-world-matters-stay-in-for-the-ride/

–

https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2013/01/06/we-dream-of-things-that-never-were-and-say-why-not/

–

https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2013/01/11/peace/

–

https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2011/04/19/our-future-lies-in-our-children-as-well/

WE SHALL OVERCOME

“A hundred times every day I remind myself that my inner and outer life depend on the labours of other men, living and dead, and that I must exert myself in order to give in the same measure as I have received and am still receiving.” – Albert Einstein

–

“Perseverance is more prevailing than violence; and many things which can’t be overcome when they are together, yield themselves up when taken little by little.”
– Plutarch

–

“Gratitude unlocks the fullness of life. It turns what we have into enough, and more. It turns denial into acceptance, chaos to order, confusion to clarity. It can turn a meal into a feast, a house into a home, a stranger into a friend.”
– Melody Beattie

You may write me down in history
With your bitter, twisted lies,
 You may trod me in the very dirt
But still, like dust, I’ll rise. –  Maya Angelou

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

We shall overcome one day in ourselves, with gratitude to our past, our present and our future. Gratitude to those who made our life and circumstances possible. Gratitude to our friends and opponents who made us what we are now or what we have been, – who shaped our response, – those who were “our teachers” in both the right and the wrong things.

We may overcome ourselves within the things we cherish, within the positives amidst negatives, – the last being different for all of us. Different for us as individuals, different for us as a class or group as well, whether we are part of a city, state or country.

The Freedom Fighters in the US shaped the future for equal rights among black and whites. This shaping of the future was not without violence and cruelty. Non-violent struggle did overcome racial segregation, like it did overcome apartheid in South Africa with similar forces in action elsewhere many years later.  Again however, not without violence and cruelty.  People beaten, shot, disappearing, often at young age, – by their opponents. But they did overcome, marching up to freedom. Freedom land as a way of achieving, not the final goal, but a way. A way with violence to be avoided, – where possible. At least by not provoking this violence.  What we give we tend to receive. If we answer all violence with violence it makes us all blind and there are smarter ways, – ways being less destructive and more effective to bend sweltering injustice into a strapping justice of different sorts. It is the way of violence to be avoided within all reasonable dimensions.

–

Julian Bond, civil rights activist

Like the US was trying to control the status quo in the 196o ties,  South Africa was trying to defend the rights of minorities by compromising the rights of majorities. Many countries are still doing the same. But the non-violence movement has been neither restricted to the US nor South Africa. And still we benefit from such a movement, and the movement needs to grow as it is the only way forward to overcome man made institutional and other dangers being difficult to control. If man made dangers can’t be controlled by reason anymore, we are at risk of being controlled by defeatist perceptions regarding  those dangers, with the risk those perceptions take over at a cost of man made opportunities we have. The power of a non violence movement need to be able then to show greater leverage than the power of senseless massacres or decisions to go this direction.

Where the choice is made to make peaceful revolution impossible, the alternative however of a violent uprising is inevitable.

–

Peaceful change with the least possible violence is the way to overcome. A movement which should grow from Syria to North Korea, from oppressive regimes in South America to similar regimes in Asian countries. But the means by which the movement for change now tries to break through is by no means the same or fitting the Gandhi/Martin Luther King or Mandela legacy, – seems to evolve more dangerous even and perhaps more deadly. Often leaders now responsible for venom being injected to paralyze it’s people in fear, and not to speak out anymore.

Bloodshed and massacres do not seem to stop and the question is what sort of good may come out of all of this and what sort of “reason” people or countries may come up with , without making situations at various places more explosive.  Whilst some people may feel gratitude for both the past, the present and the future, the question as well what sort of “gratitude” people may have at places in the most difficult circumstance one can imagine,  – situations like we can only recognize from war’s we have been able to leave behind. The gratitude to live for some might be replaced by the gratitude to die for others, which is the worst of all gratitude as the last gratitude we should have is the gratitude to live. And this is the preferred gratitude we should be able to share and to contribute to, if at all possible.

The last is what we may think. But people are able to take this away from other people by the venom of hate, by the brutality of their violence, by the starvation of people. Some of them will “overcome” but not all of them. Some of them may see the new day but not all of them. Some of them may feel peace but others may have lost all peace, all gratitude, and don’t feel human anymore as their humanity has been compromised and violated on the altar of merciless torture and abuse.

–

It is this almost complex manifestation in nature as well, that life often comes at a cost of other life, –  whilst as human beings by nature we have the gift by choice. The last in general to change the dynamics of hate and destruction into the dynamics of a reasonable peace. Not an ideal peace perhaps. However, combined with more justice, at least the most desired option within the reasoning of our human options.  As long as we have such a desire and imagine the implications in the best possible ways, – we may attract positive outcomes if those ripples of hope are shared at the best possible frequencies of our human dimensions. With this shared gift we can change and “overcome”.

Liberation is only possible by ordinary people doing extra ordinary things by non-violence. The power of ordinary people can keep a dream alive, can move governments if so required, is able to resolve some of the dangers of war and all-out violence. Is even able to “move” people who lost their dreams as due to even an overload of prosperity. The other way around, – so to say, as people can “sleep in” through prosperity, being blind for what is going around.  However, whilst the broader movement of non-violent action resisting what persists along the lines of injustice of various kind, the question is whether the non violent approach as a starting  point is always possible to be continued under all circumstances as part of the process of liberation?

If we look at history the answer is simply: No!  Without violence it was not possible to remove Hitler and his followers. Without violence it was not possible e.g during WW2 to protect the Jews in various countries like e.g. the Netherlands, where resistance groups had to target Gestapo Officers responsible for the transportation of Jews to concentration camps, and likewise had to target collaborators who worked with the Gestapo. Without the perseverance of Brittain and the support of the US Hitler’s “Third Reich” would have had free play.  It is just an example. And there are far more and other examples as well. However non-violent action to bring required change is the most favorable and most honorable way to add to peaceful dynamics which may last. Perseverance is more prevailing than persistent violence

Let’s be grateful that despite tears, pain, hardship and even death, – history showed the growing seeds of forces turning against evil and overcome destructive powers. Therefore, still we can say “we shall overcome” even if we are not allowed to see the promised land, – we shall overcome.

Even with our confined days on this earth we have the choice to try to reduce destruction and improve life and the circumstances of those who needless suffer as due to the choices of evil powers, the last which should not to be tolerated in our times. Powers which are due to be eliminated as due to the risks they impose on humanity.

Time is slow for those in need. Time is slower for those who are desperate and time stands still  almost when people lose their loved one’s in ongoing violence. Violence  eg in Sudan, Syria, Iraq, Gaza and other areas…

Protecting of self-interest when under threat as a country is one thing. However, this should be reasonable and within proportions.  Being the captives of perceived national security threats and not being able to reach out to the voices of crippled people under the brutal forces of any military powers or secret police at times, – is hard to tolerate in a world which has been faced with so much pathological violence before. And whilst time may be slow, here  time is of the essence to resist this,  as morbid powers are not allowed to take over.

History did teach us many lessons in what works and also things which do not work, and we can be grateful for this.  However the highest appreciation is not utter words only but to live by those lessons, to live the gratitude for those lessons and to pay tribute to those in history who did contribute to more justice and gratitude and peace for our times and all times, – even when there are still areas on this planet where this is not felt at all.

Our obligation is not an obligation to pay lip service only.

We live in a world with increasing injustice, the last even within institutions,  – a venom if not eradicated!

Though we are limited in our endeavours, we shall overcome one day, .  as long as our dreams do last, .  as long as our unaffected efforts do not rest, .   as long as our mind conceives and believes, our gratitude does not cease, and we as people are able to fulfil, . in a way which lifts the burdens in and around us and makes us free.

–

Let us raise again in this dream, as to never forget, …as this is the reality of life where all men are created equal, – but most being surely more unequal through the far stretching differences and circumstances of life,  – the last for certain not always by choice.

Therefore, –  again, and more than ever before: resist in truth what is wrong,  and persist in truth what is good  whilst protecting live as worthy as possible.

–

We may have fallen with our feet trodden beneath the dust, but we shall rise up again. Reminding ourselves that our lives depend on the labour of others and that we have to give in the same measure as we received, taking things day by day and step by step, – knowing that endurance is more powerful  than ferocity.

–

Knowing as well that there is a place and time for the fullness of real gratitude,  and that amidst the corners of history’s shame we shall overcome one day,  as the wall’s of hatred and prejudice have been broken then, –  and mercy may prevail for our time and all times! ———–It’s a concept, a harness so to speak, an ideal, and perhaps not always applicable in the complexities of this world. But it’s the most preferable approach and guideline, just because of the complexities of this world.

–

Thanks!

Paul 

Paul Alexander Wolf

>>>>

–

> https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2013/01/06/we-dream-of-things-that-never-were-and-say-why-not/ <

->>>

Related articles

• Gratitude is more than a once-a-year event (hollyonthehill.com)
• An attitude of gratitude (disruptyourlife.wordpress.com)
• We Shall Overcome (paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com)
• We shell overcome one day! (svobodnite.wordpress.com)
• Living In Thanksgiving Daily (Even When I Don’t Feel Like It) (mormonsoprano.com)
• Appreciation vs. Gratitude (quantumperceptions.wordpress.com)
• Archbishop Villegas prays for peace, end to violence and corruption (newsinfo.inquirer.net)
• 365 Quotes to Inspire You in 2014 (inc.com)
• My Gratitude to Prisoner Number 46664 (crazyorganicmama.com)
• Humanitarian Aid Helps Us Too (classwarinamerica.wordpress.com)

Anniversary JFK assassination and review

 

Picture of President Kennedy in the limousine in Dallas, Texas, on Main Street, minutes before the assassination. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

is an edited version on

Review  JFK  Assassination  2011: An  issue for both Democrats and Republicans. on June 9, 2011, – with more available information now.

 

INTRODUCTION

 

Today 50 years ago was the State funeral of President John F. Kennedy, – the 35th US President.

 

After 50 years we remember President John Fitzgerald  Kennedy for the things he left in both the memories of many, – and history.  Assessing him we have to recognise some errors but his large accomplishments were undeniable, – likewise his enthusiasm, his youth and his forward-looking approach in easing the tensions with the Soviet Union and Peace in general.

 

He played a unique role in his short time as US President.

 

It is fair to say he saved the world from a nuclear disaster dealing in his own way with the Cuba crisis in 1962, – ignoring the suggested hard-line approach.

 

He was an inspiration for a whole generation in his time and 50 years afterwards vivid memories have been shared all over the United States.

 

 

What happened in Dallas in terms of major crime with ongoing criminally negligent investigations in the past,  can’t be allowed to happen again.

 

Whilst this was allowed to happen without real reliable investigation and many things being left not aimed to be disclosed, –  it may happen again in different identities.

 

This is one of the reasons the JFK assassination can’t be put to rest as yet.

 

With the JFK assassination the US made a significant historical change with e.g. immediately afterwards an increase in the war activities in Vietnam  and more bombs being dropped over there than during  the second world war in Europe. After the JFK assassination a highly controversial  Lyndon Johnson took over as US President with close connection with the notorious FBI Chief Herbert Hoover and various others. If the JFK assassination would not have taken place LBJ would have been replaced as Vice-President as due to his own history of corruption. Hence the full background dynamics being important to be revealed, – including the forces behind this assassination. The Vietnam war became a massive drama and created significant unrest in the US.

 

When Robert F Kennedy in 1968 decided to run for the US Presidency as part of the movement against the war in Vietnam and as part of a growing need for social justice he was assassinated in June by likely the same undercurrents in US society who wanted to continue the war in Vietnam.

 

Boris Yaro’s photograph of Robert F. Kennedy lying wounded on the floor immediately after the shooting. Kneeling beside him is 17-year-old Juan Romero,[1] who was shaking Kennedy’s hand when Sirhan Sirhan fired the shots.
Location	Ambassador Hotel, Los Angeles, California, USA
Coordinates	34°03′35″N 118°17′50″W / 34.0597°N 118.2971°W / 34.0597; -118.2971Coordinates: 34°03′35″N 118°17′50″W / 34.0597°N 118.2971°W / 34.0597; -118.2971
Date	June 5, 1968 12:15 a.m. (Pacific Time Zone)
Target	Robert F. Kennedy
Weapon(s)	.22 caliber Iver-Johnson
Deaths	1
Injured (non-fatal)	5
Perpetrator	Sirhan Sirhan

 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

The FBI did contribute then to various unrest and violence outside the  Democratic Convention in Chicago, with brutal force against anti Vietnam war demonstrations, adding as such to a climate of major social unrest after the murders of both Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy.

 

All this helped to get the notorious Richard Nixon to become US President who worked with the military establishment to favour and carry out massive bombardments with chemical warfare in North Vietnam.

 

After it proved that he ordered the Watergate burglary he had to step down to avoid both impeachment and further criminal prosecution. His first Vice President  Spiro Agnew had to step down as due to fraudulent activities and a new Vice – President was nominated before Nixon had to resign from office.

 

Watergate scandal
Watergate complex
Events
List[hide] Timeline Nixon White House tapes Operation Sandwedge Operation Gemstone Watergate burglaries 1972 U.S. presidential election Presidency of Richard Nixon “Saturday Night Massacre“ “White House horrors“ United States v. Nixon Inauguration of Gerald Ford

 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

This new Vice-President was Gerald Ford. Ford was called in Congress once “The CIA Man”. The last was not a surprise. Gerald Ford has been closely connected with the Warren Commission and leaked all confidential information to Herbert Hoover. The mission of the Warren Commission was to satisfy the public with an investigation into the JFK assassination, but to mislead all US citizens about the truth regarding CIA involvement.  Most of the participants of  this Warren Commission were very compliant and if there was any doubt, Gerald Ford made sure  that Herbert Hoover from the FBI was informed as Hoover had ways to change people’s mind.  Hoover had secret files about almost anybody.

 

FBI and CIA were not always friendly with each other, but agreed however on the assassination of JFK  together with the new President (LBJ)  that the truth should be concealed at any cost, which happened up until now.

 

Various witnesses disappeared at the time or were killed, evidence disappeared or was tampered and/or did not reach the Warren Commission.

 

When Gerald Ford took over from Richard Nixon he knew that further investigations in the Watergate scandal would open a can of worms leading to CIA connections being closely associated with the JFK assassination (some of the Watergate burglars were connected with the JFK assassination), – hence Richard Nixon got a full pardon. 

 

Any further investigation would  incriminate both Nixon and Ford and so the change of events after the 22nd of November in Dallas continued to scar various governments.

 

It went on to President Herbert Walker Bush, who has been Vice-President under President Reagan and President after the Reagan administration. Bush senior (a lot younger then) was present during a CIA briefing the day after the assassination in Dallas. Being later on CIA Director he had full insight in related state secrets. The war in Vietnam finished at the end of April 1975, but all Administrations after JFK – apart from the Carter Administration – had dark secrets with the CIA. Never disclosed in full to Congress.  

 

The background powers (due to be reduced under the Kennedy Administration) increased in strength and influence after the JFK assassination.

 

The first Iraq war under Bush senior was  justified as there was a UN mandate and Iraq did invade Kuwait. Bush stopped this war when the UN mandate was completed. 

 

President Clinton took over as US President from Herbert Walker Bush but the power of the CIA during the Reagan/Bush years had grown so much that he could not speak up against the Iran Contra scandal, when he was Governor in Arkansan. Under Federal Management one of the airports in Arkansas was used for getting drugs into the country, whilst the profits and military support went to the contra’s in the dirty war in Nicaragua.  Bill Clinton was aware then what was happening and did neither share concern at Congressional level on behalf  of the Democratic Party and his conscious, nor did he  respond to – or support – a public request for independent investigations in Arkansas then. And so Clinton – like some of his predecessors – was  already compromised before even entering the White House.

 

When George W Bush became President the background powers in the US had more or less free play as Dick Cheney the Vice-President (who served under earlier Administrations) and the Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld (who served as well under earlier Administrations) were joint allies,  – both in the stand down of security during 9/11, the controlled demolitions, and the cover up with a heavily delayed establishment of the “9/11 Commission”. The last having the Government mission to allow an investigation, but to mislead the public as well. However as the Warren Commission did after the JFK assassination, also “the 9/11 Commission’s” conclusions left many unanswered questions whilst 2 wars for the wrong reasons were started  with many abuses of human rights. 

 

At present both George Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney can’t enter Switzerland without the risk of being arrested and standing trial for what they have to answer for in line with Swiss law.  However not in the US.  In the US they get protection as no further investigations have been supported despite many high ranking officials like ex FBI Division Chief Ted Gunderson and e.g. Major General Albert Stubblebine (the last being ex Commanding General of the US Army Intelligence) reflected on 9/11 being an internal job,  – facilitated by the CIA to provide the US President an excuse to go to war.

 

It goes that far that if the past Administration would have be denied protection by President Obama, the current President would have found himself on a collision course with the CIA and the Pentagon from the beginning of his Administration, – with the 22nd of November 1963 not unlikely due to be repeated.

 

President Obama did chose to leave the past behind and concentrate on the future whilst more pressing problems were at stake in 2009, including a terrible financial situation of the United States.  Apart from this an “Imperfect Union” , widespread divisions and significant security issues pending. He balanced well amidst all this with a stable forward looking view on his anticipated policies for the future.

 

History changed however forever after the assassination of JFK, as the background powers in the US were allowed to grow at exceptional levels without too much resistance. People being President were already compromised at times before they even became President and had to work with both the CIA and the Pentagon, not rarely on the conditions of those Agencies or Organisations. 

 

President Obama did not only take over the budget deficit from his predecessor, he took also over a CIA and Pentagon being more strongly established than President Truman ever contemplated when he warned for those excessive powers. Only in the right hands those powers can work for the real benefit of the US, but in the wrong hands they may inflict disaster at world level. Hence President Obama had to balance wisely, with courtesy, diplomacy and using his level of influence for the benefit indeed of a better Union. It proved to be difficult enough with the right wing part of the Republican party being as obstructive as it could be.

 

With the assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy the US Government was in retrospect in a wider sense responsible for perverting the course of justice in a major crime against both the US and the deepest foundations of the Constitution, – which determines where the balance of power should be.

 

They could walk away from it. Never being convicted, as they were able to be protected by the law they compromised. The FBI Chief Hoover made sure protection was in place for those who worked with him.  This was possible in the United States of America. It will be still possible in the US  as the US has no sufficient accountability systems on board within this domain to prevent those things, – if they would ever occur again in a variety of scenario’s.

 

Both the CIA and the FBI have a lot of good people doing their job with conviction and integrity and there have been many people at the highest levels of the CIA and the Military Establishment asking for renewed investigations in e.g. the 9/11 drama, – as things simply did not add up and this incident with all its mysterious demolitions and the Pentagon being more likely attacked by a missile etc went too far. The background powers were even now prepared to allow and escalate a terror attack on US ground, whilst with premeditated controlled demolitions of  some WTC buildings a drama was created  to mislead public opinion afterwards and allow the US to go to war in an area ready for a US war after the CIA “work up” during the Clinton Administration since 1992.

 

It is clear that when the order to kill comes from “higher levels”, those who are responsible are often able to walk away, as long as they stick to the conduct of silence.

 

This is the reason we have to go back to the JFK assassination, back to the facts as they were and learn from it, – because this assassination was an “internal Pearl Harbour” against both the US Constitution, the law and everything where the US  is supposed to stand for. The enemy was within the systems of Government and not outside.

 

This is an issue for both US Republicans and Democrats to resolve as part of effective legislation perhaps, but finally as well as part of a realistic historical view on US Government dynamics during and after the JFK assassination.

–

 

CHANGED PERCEPTIONS

–

(Abbreviations used:  JFK= John Fitzgerald Kennedy.   LBJ=Lyndon Baines Johnson.   RFK= Robert Francis Kennedy.   MLK= Martin Luther King).  ARRB = Assassination Records Review Board 1998)

—————>>>>>>>>

The freedom of information act in the US did show various new information on lots of issues in the US, including e.g. more documents about the assassination of President John F Kennedy on the 22nd of November 1963 in Dallas.

Enough material is available now to change the perception on JFK’s death and the circumstances leading to it, – however much of the available information has been in part redacted, changed over time, and some most secret documents not being released as yet.

FBI files created by former FBI Chief J Edgar Hoover do contain information with various degree of reliability as his files were at times used to compromise his own opponents or the opponents  of those persons he had a good working relation with.

Despite many publications already over the last 50 years,   it would seem that some recent records have not been put together as yet, – and the aim of this article is to give a fresh review on what actually happened in Dallas, including  the dynamics leading to it.

It is not that important for the purpose of this article who fired the real shots from the various directions.

More important however are the forces behind the assassination of  this popular President,  who was perceived as a danger by different groups and people at the same time. As will be illustrated, this created as such an opportunity to help to develop a monster plot with the help of fugitive undercurrents,  which existed at the core of America’s democracy. Hence what is known about it and still on classified files are not likely to be released, not even in 2017.

The US – in retrospect – allowed JFK to be killed without any full and proper investigations after the assassination, with most  justice systems deliberately failing at the same time, and officials including media misleading the public. It did affect the heart of the US as a democracy 50 years ago, but events in US politics continued to affect the heart of the US as a democracy,  in various ways for decades after the 22nd of November 1963.

Today with all modern (adapted) technology being available,  together with the option by choice to reopen the investigations based on non revealed ARRB  files (transcripts, memoranda, hearings etc) after the final (not conclusive)  ARRB Report (which is  filed in 1998 at the JFK Collection at the National Archives and Records Administration in College Park,Maryland), – renewed investigation is an option for a democracy which does respect itself in terms of lasting justice.

Based on well documented wiretaps of mobsters before and after the JFK assassination, the House Assassination Committee concluded 16 years after the Dallas crimes:   “There is solid evidence….that Hoffa, Marcello and Trafficante – 3 of the most important targets for criminal prosecution by the Kennedy Administration – had discussions with their subordinates about murdering President Kennedy.”

For certain the mob was a beneficiary for the assassination, but there were more. The organised crime drive in particular from the Attorney general Robert Kennedy prompted certainly a plan to strike back. In the first instance it would be an assassination on Robert Kennedy but the plan shifted later to the President.

The information about the JFK assassination till so far provides really more direction, – on how high-ranking American Government officials (including President Lyndon B. Johnson) dealt with matters after that fateful day in Dallas in 1963.  However there is more to this to be discussed.

–

WHAT HAPPENED IN THE EARLY DAYS OF  JFK’s  PRESIDENCY?

–

Three days after the Bay of Pig crisis at the early start of his Presidency, – Kennedy ( being insufficient  informed by both the CIA and the Pentagon Generals)  started a Cuban Study Group (leaded by General Maxwell Taylor) to “direct special attention to the lessons which can be learnt from those events in Cuba.”    It sounds trivial but  “The Cuba study group” was  a significant creation of the Kennedy Presidency and whilst receiving little notice at the time, it was the source of utter CIA discontent after Allen Dulles as head of the CIA was fired by the President, – following  his failures within the CIA to advise him in line with correct procedure about the pending Bay of Pig invasion in Cuba, including its viability. The Bay of Pig  invasion in Cuba was a profound disaster for various reasons. Kennedy took responsibility for this.

Both the Kennedy’s and the CIA/Pentagon started a collision course as due to profound different perceptions on the military future of the US, – besides various personal animosities which played at a different level than the animosities with the mob. The introduction of Robert Kennedy in various security meetings as requested by the President, and RFK’s high level of assertiveness with some controversial Generals did not go always very well.

JFK ignored during the Cuban missile crisis (which brought the world close to nuclear disaster), – military advise to attack Cuba and with restraint and a last-minute deal with the Soviets on US missiles in Turkey, – he avoided an all out nuclear confrontation with the Soviet Union. The Pentagon advised to attack Cuba, indicating this was the best course of action, however in retrospect nuclear missiles were already installed in Cuba and Russian commanders were under the instruction to fire those nuclear missiles in case of a US attack on Cuba. The Pentagon’s advise at the time was that there were only missile installations and no missiles as yet, – this illustrating how the intelligence worked at the time. JFK’s reservations about his military advisers increased and vice versa.

Again against Military &  CIA  advise  JFK  wanted  to ease the tensions with the Soviet Union to avoid war. He knew the dangers of war and being ready though to go to war if there was really no other rational option anymore,  war was for him really the last resort, – whilst war actually seemed to be the priority choice of some hard-liners within the Pentagon. Some of those hardliners proposed a pre-emptive nuclear strike on the Soviets, which got JFK really more worried about the Pentagon than a surprise attack from the Soviet leader at the time.

JFK’s  “Peace speech” reflected his ability to humanize the Soviet Union, whilst his “Berlin speech” showed his profound dismay with the political system.  Both JFK’s Peace speech and his speech about “Secret Organisations” in the US did indicate the direction this President wanted to follow, – besides the politics of transparency. This stunned both the CIA and the Pentagon

Fidel Castro in Cuba (a close ally of the Soviets)  remained however a significant obstacle (already since the Eisenhower Administration),  and a secret joint mission of both the CIA and the Mafia (the last with connections in Cuba) were close of being executed at the end of 1963.  The mission was  to kill Castro.  Robert Kennedy was involved in those plans, but tried however to stop Mafia involvement on the 7th of May 1962 during  a briefing  from CIA officials.

The Church Committee in 1975  reported that after this CIA briefing and discussion with Robert Kennedy, – the CIA with William Harvey continued to work closely with at least Rosselli to arrange the assassination of Castro.  This is significant as it is clear as  with other Presidents there was no full control over the CIA. The mob including Sam Giancana John Rosselli and Trafficantes had certain cooperative roles with the CIA (those roles being established for  quite some time already) –  long before the Kennedy Administration.

President Kennedy was aware of the potential use of Giancana, whilst having an affair with his mistress (Exner). The last did not put him in an easy position with the FBI Director Hoover, who was aware of this. This apart from the fact that Kennedy’s affair with Exner was taking a high risk to be compromised.

JFK planned for the future to recognise Cuba, assuming if  “they would buy toasters and dishwashers” – at some stage they would throw Castro out themselves. Obviously he did not accept nuclear missiles in Cuba directed at any city in the US, – but he preferred to ease at least some of the tensions about Cuba in his second term in office,  if he would win the 1964 elections.

He preferred a pragmatic approach and not increasing tensions, – again against hard-liners within the CIA and the Pentagon who started to perceive JFK as a security risk for the US, – especially as President Kennedy had little desire to escalate matters in Vietnam..

Under the Eisenhower Administration the CIA had already directives to coöperate with the mafia to overthrow Castro and under the Kennedy administration the CIA developed plans to gun down Castro in Cuba with the help of the Mafia. The Mafia had a strong interest in a Cuba without Castro for different reasons. The Church Committee discovered some aid plots  involving the CIA from 1960 to 1965 to assassinate Fidel Castro.

In 1960 President elect John F Kennedy was told by the CIA’s deputy Director, Richard Bisell, about the plot to kill Castro. This included mob help from Giancana, who has been asked by Frank Sinatra to help the Kennedy campaign in Illinois during the 1960 elections. Joseph Kennedy,sr would possibly seem to have asked the mob to help somehow as well but did not make any deals. Reportedly Frank Sinatra actually made a deal (without Joseph Kennedy being directly involved), assuming that he did do the right thing for the Kennedy’s. He did indicate even that JFK (once elected) would leave the mob as much as possible alone. However this did not happen.

Meanwhile the mob felt utterly  betrayed by both the President and his brother (the Attorney General), – as they anticipated protection once JFK was elected President. Once in office, Robert Kennedy in his function of Attorney General (on behalf of his brother) started the most intensive crusade against organised crime in US history.  The Kennedy’s had even before the 1960 elections involvement in vigorously anti- crime dealings as documented in the hearings with Jimmy Hoffa – the boss of the Teamsters – when JFK was Senator of Massachusetts.  As matters evolved in the White House, they (the mob and Jimmy Hoffa)  increasingly hated both the Kennedy brothers, and with Jimmy Hoffa  (an old RFK enemy)  they waited for the right timing for revenge. Giancana cursed Kennedy indicating that he went out of his way to help him to win the election, whilst his brother (“Bobby”) was targeting the mob. The last  with great embarrassment for Giancana  personally in respect to the other Mafia families.

On the one hand it seemed to the mob that the Kennedy Administration (with the President even having an affair with Giancana’s mistress, hearing Mafia secrets perhaps) were tolerating perhaps CIA mob connections  to assassinate Castro, – whilst  on the other hand being tough on organised crime. They really could not take this.

With Robert Kennedy in the final analysis trying to stop those long existing connections, –  this may have really infuriated both the CIA and the mob again,  who felt both let down  by the Kennedy’s anyway. Exner (Giancana’s mistress) once said: “They hated Bobby!”

Frank Ragano (Tampa mob lawyer) once reflected on a chilling conversation between his clients Trafficante, Jimmy Hoffa and Carlos Marcello. The three of them have been under scrutiny as a result of Robert Kennedy’s organised crime drive and had strong motives for revenge and survival. They considered what would happen if anything would happen to Bobby and they agreed that the President would  go after his enemies with added determination. The other option was “if something would happen to the President”, – Hoffa asked.     “Lyndon Johnson would get rid of Bobby”,  – one of Hoffa’s lawyers reflected.

–

OTHER BENEFICIARIES  OF  JFK ‘s  ASSASSINATION?

–

Obviously Robert Kennedy was in a profound state of shock after the death of his brother. He had not only to deal with his own grief, the grief of the Kennedy family, – but he became aware that he has been on a collision course for which he felt he was in part to blame.

When Robert was assassinated in 1968 he went to his grave likely believing that there was a real connection between his organised crime drive and his brother’s assassination, – which proved not to be true. The forces were far more stronger and complex than the Mafia on its own.  During the Kennedy Administration the spirit of the “cold war environment” was that within the CIA anything was allowed to overthrow Castro and to oppose the Soviets.   Within this context a further collusion of interest evolved between  more beneficiary’s of President Kennedy’s death. With close connections between the CIA and those in Cuba feeling hostile to Castro  – ( the CIA,  the mob and anti Castro people feeling betrayed by Kennedy due to him aborting the Bay of Pig invasion with no further support from the air)  – further dynamics were evolving, with both the CIA and the FBI (Hoover) developing  increasing resentments against JFK.  The CIA and FBI not always friendly with each other recognised some common ground on JFK and his brother.  Those groups had already positive connections with Vice – President Lyndon Johnson. However also with former vice -President Nixon. ( As a matter of interest Jack Ruby who killed Lee Harvey Oswald, the alleged assassin of JFK, – has been working for Richard Nixon since 1947). The question was how the CIA and the Military would  be involved.  – or was it the other way around? The last is an interesting question and the final answer will be somehow documented in the record still being on file.

JFK’s intentions to ease the tensions with the Soviet Union and a leaked memo that he was prepared to withdraw from Vietnam – on top of earlier evidence in which he showed  to follow a  line of action  independent from his military advisers (in close consultation with his brother RFK), – seemed to turn the tide really against him. In the public arena his speeches reflected directions of peace and opposition against activities of so-called “secret societies”. What Truman said in private about the CIA and the military, –  Kennedy brought in public what both the CIA and secret organisations (e.g “Skull and Bones”)  never wanted to hear. What was going to happen if this President was going to be re elected again in 1964, with such strong ties with his influential brother???

JFK’s direction was clearly against the hardliners within both the CIA and the Pentagon. Whilst both the Pentagon and the CIA were  strongly in favour to increase the war efforts in Vietnam, President Kennedy – supporting those efforts initially (as he did with the Bay of Pigs, based on wrong advise),  – became increasingly aware that this was not the desired direction for the future. When a secret document leaked that he wanted to withdraw from Vietnam he added only to increasing animosity with some Pentagon Generals, – besides the CIA.  The mob was quite willing to coöperate with both the CIA and others to do “the job” in Dallas (they had good coöperation with the CIA anyway about Cuba) and 3 different assassination scenario’s seemed to have been in place that day if the attempt on Daley Plaza would fail.  The CIA and the mob were in agreement “to sort JFK out”, each for different reasons. Alan Dulles, despite being fired as CIA boss, still had close connections with some hardliners within the CIA and there was still real animosity.  A profound difference in perception on the strategic military direction of the US was at the heart of this animosity, despite the fact that Kennedy was able to deal with the Pentagon more favourably than at the beginning of his Presidency. After all, the outcome of the Cuba crisis gave him some credit from at least a few within the Pentagon. The views on the future remained however most antagonistic. It was at a time as well that JFK was not too keen to have Johnson as his running-mate for the 1964 elections as due to past corruption scandals of LBJ and various other things to be leaked to LIFE magazine by RFK.

The fact that the President had such a close bond with his brother ( the Attorney general), even where it came to military operations, indicated for the Pentagon that this President (despite being prepared to listen)  would do it his own way. The CIA had similar perceptions.

Under President Truman the insidious power of the CIA became quite clear and both Truman and President Eisenhower warned for this as part of Constitutional fears for criminal peace time operations (the CIA often being side tracked from its original assignment). The CIA evolved into an operational and at times a policy making arm of the Government. Kennedy being aware and warned for those dangers by his predecessors, wanted to change this situation eventually, – being supported by his brother.  JFK reportedly planned to dismantle the CIA and the Federal Reserve whilst being ready to expose their illicit operations, – the last being most significant, but most dangerous!

Robert Kennedy not being convinced that CIA protection for the President would be always effective had contemplated on facilitating a private guard, – disconnected from the CIA, as the tensions were clearly felt. Some dangers were felt, however not that obvious as yet.

Beyond all those issues, JFK was  really able to reach outside the traditional and existing cold war perceptions of the US establishment, looking at the bigger picture to survive on this planet with a more global perspective, – whilst the CIA & the Pentagon under no circumstances wanted to buy into this, if required at all costs.

–

FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS

–

The question is how would above groups could work together. There was one more (but most significant!)  beneficiary of the assassination of the President.  Robert Kennedy opposed Lyndon Johnson for various reasons and both the Kennedy’s wanted to replace Lyndon Johnson as Vice President. As mentioned. In the 1960 LBJ was just a practical choice for JFK in the run up to the 1960 elections. The relationship between LBJ and the Kennedy brothers was at times  strained and in particular the Vice President’s relationship with Robert Kennedy were at times close to “explosive”. Lyndon Johnson had profound fears for going to jail about a potential exposure of the Bobby Baker scandal and Robert Kennedy fed extremely damaging information to LIFE magazine to show Lyndon Johnson’s corruption that would blow him “out of the water, once and for all”.

The Kennedy’s and LIFE magazine were – before JFK’s Dallas trip – only days away from politically executing Lyndon Johnson, – with his history of corruptions whilst running the Senate as a Majority leader, with LBJ still having an adviser with close Mafia connections in place. The Vice Presidential ticket in 1964 was most likely to go to either Gerry Sanford of North Carolina or George Smathers of Florida. LBJ was most aware of this!

Bobby Baker was Lyndon Johnson’s secretary and political adviser from the early 50ties until 1962, – however at the time with close connections with mobster Giancana in various business entities, – as discovered by Robert Kennedy. Robert Kennedy also found out that that Baker was also involved in procuring women for President Kennedy, the last having a well documented interest for females (at times most risky liaisons), – with  an added risk for further black-mail  from the FBI Director Hoover.

Whilst working for LBJ in the White House, Baker continued to have close connections with Giancana and an associate of Jimmy Hoffa, – together with Clint Murchison. Not the best people to connect with if your boss is US Vice-President. It is clear how close the mob was to both Baker and via Baker, – to LBJ.   LBJ received a pay off of $100000,= cash in a suitcase as due to his role in securing Fort Worth TFX contract (witnessed by Don B. Reynolds), which was needless to say both corrupt and highly controversial in his place.

After LBJ became President one of the first things was to contract B.Everett Jordan to prevent this information being published and a smear campaign was organised to damage Reynolds, – strongly assisted by FBI Chief Hoover who had developed a file about him. It is clear in retrospect that LBJ was under massive threat before the Kennedy assassination of his corruption being exposed by RFK.  As Jimmy Hoffa’s lawyer noted in a conversation mentioned earlier, the problem would not be solved by taking Robert Kennedy out of the picture.

LBJ  was for Government Agencies an ideal candidate for a Kennedy succession if  Government Agencies together with the mob could settle “the matter” on the 22 nd of November 1963 in Dallas at 12.30 pm. The timing was right as it would not be in LBJ’s interest to have the Bobby Baker scandal and his corruption leaked to the press. The last would indeed blow the light out of his political career. For the Vice President’s protection he needed not to be fully aware of all the in’s and out’s but his full help with the cover up afterwards was enough. LBJ had already “dirty hands”, as reportedly he has murdered a number of people in Texas (eg Henry Marchall in June 1961 ) to cover up his corruption scandals and at the background it would seem he set the scene at Dealy Plaza with others.

LBJ and Hoover had dinner at Murchison’s mansion shortly before the assassination. After this meeting LBJ told his mistress Madelyn Brown that the Kennedy’s “will never embarrass me again”. Some close associates of LBJ in 2006  (many years later) reflected similar suspicion’s of LBJ’s involvement in the JFK assassination.

In the 1980ties Billie Sol Estes – a close associate of LBJ – (just released from prison in 1983) , began confessing the murder on Henry Marshall on the orders of LBJ. The authorities never re investigated the Henry Marchall case, but it was clear that there was a risk that Henry Marchall would have “blown the whistle” at a most inconvenient moment in LBJ’s political career. Reportedly LBJ had a personal “hitman”. Reportedly as well he was ready now for “the clean up” of the Kennedy Administration with the required background support from various areas. Obviously organised crime was required to cover up the operation and both the FBI and the CIA were more than helpful with this and vice versa. Many witnesses (some 72) disappeared or were found dead after poisoning or “an accident”. LBJ was already a heavily corrupted man when he became President, and the truth about the Kennedy assassination would not serve any of his interests, neither the interests of the people he worked with in both the CIA and the FBI.

There are more stunning links.

George  Herbert  Bush (later President) worked for the CIA in 1963 and was pictured on Dealy  Plaza as one of the “crime spotters”.  Richard Nixon joined Hoover on the night of the 22st of November 1963, – the day before Kennedy arrived in Dallas. There is FBI evidence that former President George H. Bush was the recipient of a full CIA briefing on the day after the assassination of JFK, in his younger years. FBI Director Hoover wrote a memo referring to the Bush,sr briefing,   and the night before JFK was assassinated both Hoover met with others at the Dallas house of Texas oil baron Collin J “Clint” Murchison,jr as far as reports of the retired army brigadier General William Penn Jones concerned. Hoover like LBJ were most aware of what was going to happen, – likewise Richard Nixon. Never ever would Nixon later on as President allow further Watergate investigations as E Howard Hunt with a few other CIA man were both involved in the Watergate burglary and the JFK assassination.

All this information is on file and available on internet research. As earlier reflected some of the finer details are not disclosed as yet and are not due to be disclosed as they are still considered to be top secret.

Edgar J Hoover (the FBI Chief) was a close friend and neighbour of Vice – President Lyndon Johnson, – besides being a respected friend of Richard Nixon. Traditionally Hoover gathered as much as possible controversial information about any potentially threatening incumbant President and in this case he had  a file on the Kennedy’s to maintain his extremely powerful position within the FBI.  He was despised by both Kennedy’s and Hoover hated in particular Robert Kennedy,  the Attorney General (his boss at the time) , – but for certain JFK as well. His file could potentially destroy the Kennedy Presidency hence  the Kennedy’s had to put up with him. No President was able to remove Hoover as Hoover proved to be a master in creating controversial material. Besides this Hoover was on the verge of war with the Kennedy’s about their support for the equal rights movement  after the lessons from the “Freedom Riders” from Nashville in 1961 in Alabama.  Police inflicted repugnant violence in the police state of Alabama, with the FBI supporting the Ku Klux Clan. Whilst the Attorney General Robert Kennedy queried perhaps the wisdom of the Freedom Riders for their endeavours at that particular time, – supported however by his brother the US President –  he did sent Federal Troops in to protect those people. It proved that Hoover ignored his boss and no FBI protection was provided at all, despite promises.

(At the time of RFK’s death later on in 1968,  RFK was the representative for social change in the US,  for the last even more hated as well by Hoover.)

As one can see, the decision to take President John Fitzgerald Kennedy out of the picture evolved into a joint effort of various high-ranking groups and persons collaborating at the same time. Similar the disappearing of many witnesses was the effort of the same collaborating persons and groups as well, – after the Dallas crime took place. Those who gave the orders are still protected by US law,  not to be release documents incriminating the highest US officials.

Never ever was the world allowed to know what happened, – but as one can see the assassination was a Coupe d’ Etat, with a cover up of massive proportions – to be even continued under President Nixon , President Ford and Presidents following.  LBJ in retrospect blamed Castro from Cuba organising the crime, whilst admitting in 1971 that he never believed in Oswald acting alone. Before he died in the 70ties, – LBJ claimed that the JFK assassination was likely retaliation from Castro on a potential assassination in which both the CIA and the mob would be involved, and that Robert Kennedy has been involved in this anti Castro plot. In 1969 he claimed indirectly in an interview with Walter Cronkey that there could have been international connections. President Gerald Ford however (member at the time of the Warren Commission) –  just before he died in 2006 – reflected in his memoirs that the CIA was involved, which leaves besides all the other things only one conclusion about LBJ’s inconsistent reflections, and him as a person.

Robert Kennedy in agony at times about various questions he had, – asked Johnson at some stage: “Why did you kill my brother?”- Robert Kennedy knew the secrets of the Kennedy Administration, he had suspicions on both the CIA and the Mafia as well. However he was not sure as yet.  After resigning as Attorney General in the Johnson Administration (FBI Chief Hoover totally ignored him),  RFK  became elected and was “allowed” to be the Senator for New York where he would be of no harm to the LBJ Administration.

RFK accepted the outcome of the Warren Communion as he had little choice, being  both aware of the background powers and the potential of  further (anti) Kennedy smear campaigns. Besides this he was profoundly and for quite some time in despair about the death of his brother.

Robert Kennedy however was under close watch, in particular when he decided to run for the Presidential elections in 1968, – opposing both the sitting President Lyndon Johnson and the Vietnam war. If he would prove to win California in the primaries he would most likely get the Democratic nomination and being elected US President after Johnson, defeating Nixon in his second efforts against a Kennedy.  For certain RFK would have decided to withdraw from  Vietnam and change the CIA, being aware of the dangers of the CIA. Besides this he would have endeavoured a different direction for the United States, as his grief had made him more compassionate for  the less privileged  groups in and outside the US.

With Bobby Kennedy being nationally an increasing popular Presidential candidate he did sign in a way  his own death sentence.  Both the FBI Chief Hoover and the same undercurrents in the CIA with mob connections  involved in the murder of his brother, did not allow a second Kennedy to be President, – and for certain not Robert Francis Kennedy!  President Johnson felt again profoundly under threat of Robert Kennedy. It was beyond any doubt that no RFK could be allowed in the White House, by all “ruling parties” (including Nixon at the background, supported by Hoover).  Besides a different direction for the US,  for certain RFK  would be able to unravel the Coup d’Etat as it took place in Dallas the 22nd of November 1963. This would  neither be in Hoovers interest, nor in the interest of the CIA, nor in the interest of Nixon or LBJ or any other party involved in the JFK assassination less than 5 years before. It will be interesting to know which reflections are stored in the secret US files incriminating those people who gave the orders. For certain the CIA connection has been established already, but it is unclear where the instructions came from.

A smartly constructed CIA conspiracy ended Robert Kennedy’s  race for the White House in Los Angeles, June 1968. Various bullets were fired. Martin Luther King,jr was just assassinated a couple of months before by likely the same undercurrents with FBI involvement as well. Hoover hated MLK,  including the movement against the war in Vietnam.  All this created massive unrest at all corners of the US, – besides sadness after 2 assassinations in a row.  Within this climate of unrest it was not that difficult for Nixon to be elected after Robert Kennedy’s assassination  in 1968 and President Nixon  intensified the war in Vietnam. FBI Chief Hoover was a close ally of the Nixon Administration, – feeding Nixon with all sorts of wired taped material of conversations between people which could provoke potential damage if used. Henry Kissinger, who reportedly served as a dual agent for both Germany and Russia during the second world war, became Secretary of State under the Nixon Administration. When Nixon had to resign over the Watergate scandal, Gerald Ford took over as the 38th President of the US. The first thing he did – and I repeat saying this – was a Presidential Pardon for Richard Nixon, as such avoiding further investigation into the Watergate affair and preventing further revelations about further connection in the Kennedy assassination as well. The New York Times stated that Nixon’s pardon was ” a profoundly unwise, divisive, and unjust act”. In one stroke it had destroyed the new President’s “credibility as a man of judgement, candour and competence.”

Regarding Gerald Ford’s involvement in the Warren Commission in 1963-1964, – Ford said far later that the CIA  destroyed or kept from investigations critical secrets about the 1963 Dallas assassination of President Kennedy. He said as well that the aim was to prevent “certain classified and potentially damaging operations in danger of being exposed.” It was the CIA’s purpose “to hide or destroy some information which can easily being interpreted as collusion in JFK’s assassination.” In other words some information has been destroyed. Before Gerald Ford died he published his memoirs in which he stated that the CIA was involved and he knew.

It is more than likely that the US military establishment including the CIA, the FBI, various of the highest Government Officials and some politicians were involved in the JFK assassination. It is not entirely clear who gave the orders and how they were executed in detail.

An FBI memo released in 2008 -again- reflected that Gerald Ford secretly provided the FBI with information about 2 members of the Warren Commission who doubted both the FBI and the Warren Commission’s conclusions about the assassination. The position of the FBI was that there was only one gun man firing from the Texas Book depository. It proved in 1978 that Ford in 1963 volunteered to advise the FBI about the full contents of all the deliberations in the Warren Commission, provided that his comments with the FBI was kept confidential. This condition was agreed with Edgar Hoover. It proved as well that Ford had strong ties with both the FBI and Hoover. The later President Ford as a member of the Warren Commission in 1963/1964, had full insight in  the deliberate failures of the Warren Commission and played a most controversial role with the FBI whilst assisting the cover up and supporting the Warren Commission’s findings. Ford at the time had close connections with the CIA as well and was likely fully aware – later on – that there was far more to Watergate which could incriminate again highest Government officials if e.g Howard Hunt (one of the Watergate burglars) would be put in a position to break the “code of silence”. Hunt made revelations on his deathbed on his and LBJ’s involvement in the JFK assassination and if  Gerald Ford would not have given Richard Nixon a Presidential Pardon, Ford as past member of the Warren Commission could be subject for impeachment as well.

Before his poisoning death Frank Sturgess told the San Fransisco Chronicle in May 1977: ” The reason we burglarized Watergate was because Nixon was interested in stopping news leaking related to the photo’s of our role in the assassination of President John F Kennedy.” Additional assassination photo’s would seem to have been available, besides assassination footage taken from a helicopter which would proof that the story about Oswald was fabricated to support the lone – gunman and magic bullet theory. When Nixon stepped down many years later as US President over the Watergate scandal to avoid impeachment and further investigations, it was (this needs to be repeated) President Gerald Ford – who has been a controversial member of the Warren Commission in 1963- who gave Nixon a “general pardon” avoiding as such any further investigations. Gerald Ford has been publicly praised as well for his courage to leave “Watergate” behind, whilst this was clearly not an act of courage. It was again a “cover-up” and  just a reflection how the “system” worked in those days, how in a row people could get the top job in the White House whilst being corrupted beforehand. This  was possible in the United States of America, this is still possible in the US and only few people know.

Both JFK and RFK did not get the chance to change the “currents” towards more justice within the political systems of the US, hence the significance of their deaths, including the corrupting powers which followed. Powers working closely together with the massive war machinery of the Pentagon at the background and CIA covert operations of immense proportions. People like Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld appearing in various Bush Administrations. The Bush (Skull & Bones) and CIA links have been always very close. It may be questioned which oath was more important, the oath to Skull and Bones or the oath to the Constitution. George W Bush called the Constitution once a piece of paper only. What he inflicted or at the end was responsible for will be for decades top secret.

To come back to the original theme:

FBI Chief Hoover died in 1972 whilst President Nixon was in power.  Gerald Ford took over the Vice Presidency from Spiro Agnew (who took bribes) in 1973, – one year after Hoover died in office. Hoover was fully aware of the Nixon dealings. Gerald Ford had no Presidential ambitions when he became US Vice President under Nixon, but with his CIA background and past relationships with Hoover, – any secrets would be secured if he had to take over from Nixon.

What happened at Dealey Plaza in Dallas on  the 22nd of November 1963 was actually as follows:

An alleged change in the motorcade route was instructed at the last minute by LBJ and the CIA. When the Kennedy motorcade turned into Elmstreet, closing in on Dealey Plaza,  CIA protection officers to protect the President’s car were called back. As far as video footage concerned one of them reacted utterly surprised but they had to follow orders. Kennedy’s car reduced speed and was not protected at all, – whilst LBJ’s car had full CIA protection. The famous Zapruder footage of which fragments were confiscated by the FBI, revealed years later that the President’s head and upper torso moved profoundly backwards after the last fatal shot, indicating that one bullet was fired from the front – right area, –  Jackie  Kennedy’s head  turned just nearly in front of JFK’s face on impact of the fatal last bullet. She would have been killed if the bullet came from behind. After the first bullet the Presidential car reduced its anyway reduced speed further, allowing (?coincidence) the last bullet being to be fool proof. The exploding  impact of this last bullet was of such nature that it opened  almost completely the right upper site of JFK’s scalp, – leaving blood and brain material on the first (following) FBI police motor on the left hand site. Kennedy died on the spot after this last bullet and for him there was no further physical agony anymore.  More than 3 shots  were fired and at least 1 came from the back. Arriving at the Parkland Hospital, the President’s car was carefully and immediately cleaned by the FBI when the President was rushed into the emergency treatment room. Cleaning a crime scene by the FBI was most unusual for usual FBI protocol, but with Hoover in the background anything was possible. The autopsy report was falsified and the brains of the President appeared to be missing later on.

THE WARREN COMMISSION

–

The Warren Commission presents its report to President Johnson                       (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The Warren Commission was established on the 29th of November 1963 by President LBJ and he selected a group of so-called “wise man” to investigate the assassination of JFK. The 808 page final report was presented on the 24th of September 1964 and was made public 3 days later. The conclusion was that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in the killing of Kennedy and wounding the Texas Governor John Connally, besides the fact that Jack Ruby acted alone in the murder of Oswald. (There are reports Nixon ordered his employee Jack Ruby to kill Oswald, but this is subject to further prove.)

The Warren Commission which has the nickname of “The Alan Dulles Commission” (because he controlled it) proved to be an utterly failure, – like many years later the “9/11 Commission” proved to be a failure.  The 3 hardcore cover up participants of the Warren Commission were the 3 Council on Foreign Relation members: Alan Dulles (Former CIA Chief and fired by JFK),  John McCloy ( “Chairman of the American establishment” – mixing at the highest levels of intelligence and business, besides being close to the Kennedy hating Texas business élite) and Gerald Ford (later US President).    Gerald Ford was -as reflected earlier- secretly reporting the contents of the Warren Commission deliberations to Hoover and the FBI and Newsweek called -I repeat- Gerald Ford in 1970 “The CIA man in Congress”. Ford served later on under President Nixon as Vice-President and Nixon reportedly called “The Warren Commission” the biggest hoax in US history. I will repeat the last one later on in context.

The Warren Commission report is indeed an illustration of many inconsistencies, exclusions of evidence, changing stories or changes made to witness testimonies, oversights and errors. Some witnesses to either the events connected to the JFK assassination or to the assassination itself were intimidated or threatened. A suspicious large number of people connected  with the investigations of the JFK assassination died. There was a pattern of deaths around the various government investigations, both during and after the Warren Commission sessions, – besides both around the times the New Orléans District Attorney Jim Garrison started his own investigation. The pattern continued whilst the Senate Intelligence Committee looked into the potential involvement of US Intelligence Agencies in the 1970ties and when the House Select Committee on assassinations was starting up its investigations later on. All those deaths for certain were desired by those not willing to be confronted to become the truth of the JFK assassination to become public, as it would shake up the entire Government and the image in the world.

Though quite a number of classified documents were released during the mid to late 1990ties, some significant records are not scheduled to be released until 2017. This was initially 2029 and not unlikely part of it will remain that way. A Government hiding those things for sure has to hide something.

Never ever lost the US a President who compromised himself with either clandestine CIA operations or CIA inflicted terror as long as the cover up systems were in place. In 1963 the US however lost a President who despite some personal flaws had the courage to decide a more independent direction from the 2 most powerful Agencies in the US, – for the benefit of the US and the world. He was entitled to do so based on fair his fair judgement on the operations of those Agencies in those days. Needless to say that if  Nixon would have been President and not JFK during the Cuba crisis, the US would have most likely attacked Cuba and the world would have been lost within the fires of nuclear destruction.

POSSIBLE CONCLUSIONS  AND  RECOMMENDATIONS:

-The last words have not been spoken about this but a few comments are justified, just to summarise a few issues:

1.>>The JFK assassination with all the cover up’s and elimination of witnesses etc,  the dark operations of both CIA & FBI,  the links with the mob at high levels,  US Presidents being involved in an enduring cover up with LBJ reportedly even directly involved in the assassination preparation, – do show the fragility of the US as a democracy.

The systems of Government with the background powers of both the CIA and Pentagon have despite warnings from earlier Presidents never changed and still put the US potentially at risk, as illustrated e.g. during the last Bush Administration. Will touch base on the last later.

2.>>>As long as systems of US Government continue to have connections with furtive undercurrents,  – real democracy in the US could be potentially in danger. Secret operations do not only take place outside the US, – but within the US as well.

3.>>>The independence of a US President can be  taken away by both the impact of the CIA and the Pentagon. Full oversight is not always possible. All CIA and military activities of any kind need to be fully authorised by the US President, – being disclosed as well to Congress. Any activities not being disclosed to both President and Congress (the last perhaps with a delay of 3 months) need to be considered as a  breach of law and/or Constitution. The same applies for the FBI.

4.>>>When a President should be impeached it is up to the House of Representatives  and the Senate to decide as such. Under no circumstances in the US “a Coupe d’Etat” as happened in 1963 should be allowed, – neither by the CIA nor by any other Government Agency and/or related or unrelated.

5.>>>Members of secret societies may have or will have at some stage a profound conflict of interest if serving  in any Government – or related body. Representatives of any Government institution or related body, should neither by law nor in the normal practice of duty have connections with either secret societies or the mafia and/or related crime organisations. If connections proven such people have to resign from office. The point is that an oath to secret societies seems to supersede the oath to the Constitution, – as e.g. reflected during the Bush Administration.

In case the President is maintaining such relationships, the normal rules for Congress and the House of Representatives are due to prepare impeachment procedures considering the nature and seriousness of the offense.

5.>>>In the “unforeseen case” a President would be assassinated, neither the course of justice nor the hearing of witnesses (without intimidation) should be compromised in any circumstances.

OF NOTE REGARDING  THE JFK  ASSASSINATION:

Also here the last words are not spoken.

1.>>>There has been a sinister cover up by various groups and highest ranking government officials to cover the truth re the JFK assassination in Dallas. Former CIA agent and Watergate figure E. Howard Hunt before his death in 2007 (in his autobiography) implicated LBJ in the JFK assassination. Hunt claimed that LBJ organised the assassination at the background with the help of the CIA, who has been angered by Kennedy’s actions as President. It has been claimed that Nixon thought that LBJ ordered the assassination, but again this is subject to evidence.

LBJ mistress (Madelyn Brown) did also implicate LBJ with the assassination of JFK. In 1997 she claimed that LBJ along with Hunt started to plan an assassination as early as 1960. Brown claimed that the conspiracy involved dozens of persons, including the leadership of the FBI.  Both the  Mafia and well known politicians have been involved, – with journalists being helpful in various ways. Similar suspicions have been echoed by a number of Johnson’s associates in the 2006 documentary “Evidence of revision.”

2.>>>Regarding the autopsy report Douglas Horn – the Assassination Record Review Board Chief analyst for military records – said that he was “90-95% certain” that the photographs in the National Archives are not of President Kennedy’s brains. Dr Gerry Aguilar together with Dr Cyril Wecht wrote in the 1999 “Consortium News”: According to Horn’s findings, the second brain – which showed an exit wound in the front –  replaced Kennedy’s real brain – which revealed greater damage to the rear, consistent with an exit wound and thus evidence from a shot in the front.

3.>>>Emiritis Professor of history David Wrone (Wisconsin University – Stephen’s Point), after examining the Zapruder film in 2003, concluded that the shot(s) that killed JFK came from the  the grassy knoll at Dealy Plaza. From 3 different angles, three shots were fired, non of them from the window of Lee Harvey Oswald at the Texas Book Depository.

The wooden fence atop the grassy knoll, and the Triple Underpass with the highway sign, which at the time of the assassination read “Fort Worth Turnpike Keep Right” in the Zapruder film.   (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

RFK  ASSASSINATION in 1968.

–http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GoKzCff8Zbs

1.>>>RFK has been assassinated because the same people being in place responsible for the JFK assassination would not allow an RFK Presidency, with implications on discovery of the truth, a shake up within the CIA systems, withdrawal from Vietnam, and with a “no pardon” for LBJ, Hoover, Allan Dulles, Gerald Ford, the CIA and others. Not only this but his true sense of required social reforms were not accepted by those who wanted the status quo to be continued with Nixon.

CONCLUDING IN GENERAL:

Final conclusions are not possible as yet

1.>>>Potential dangerous US dynamics are still there and could strike again at any time in the future. As long as a US President stays within reason of the established frame work of both FBI, the CIA and the Pentagon he is on safe grounds, – however if he is braking with old traditions and existing connections – even if they are controversial or corrupt (depending on the dynamics and undercurrents), – then even a US President again would be at potential risk of being assassinated,  even if there are no constitutional grounds for impeachment. The cover up’s of the Warren Commission with all the participants, including the joint dealings of both the FBI, CIA and the Mafia on the 22nd of November 1963, – were not only unconstitutional but they were high treason to the US, hence all efforts were put in place to wipe out all potential witness and destroy or tamper most of the crucial evidence. It proved that all involved high-ranking government officials and furtive undercurrents were stronger than the US Constitution (or those who were supposed to protect this)  in their joint efforts to mislead the public  in the aftermath of this horrendous crime.

2.>>>The complications of the CIA and Pentagon being a disproportionate power in the US has never been resolved, likewise the undercurrents being involved in various actions both at US homeland and abroad, – despite historical warnings  from both Truman and Eisenhower.

Dallas 1963 proved that even for a popular and powerful US President, – neither personal safety nor Presidential protection rules will be secured if Government Agencies conspire (e.g. with the mob)  to end a US President.

3.>>>In the more recent past there are still many unanswered questions as well about e.g. the 9/11 drama including the vertical collapse of Building 7  -(WTC7) , – which did show a controlled demolition with the destruction of lots of investigative CIA material. See nr 8 again for more detail as repeating certain facts may help to see the complexities.

The building was of a very sound structure and this particular collapse had nothing to do with the obvious bin Laden’s terrorist attack in Lower Manhattan. The attack was reportedly used to provoke a drama far worse to aid the US to retaliate both in Iraq and Afghanistan with public support.

4.>>>The CIA has been called on several occasions the military wing of the Council of Foreign Relations. It has however never been as such formally established, but it seems close to the practical reality if legislation is not being implemented to cut the powers of this organisation.

1. >>>Still the Warren Commission’s findings have never been “formally rejected” by the US Government and the United States Government allowed one of it’s finest Presidents to be killed without any proper & independent investigation, – regardless the outcome!

2. >>>The House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) in 1976 on the assassinations of JFK, MLK and the shooting of Governor George Wallace, believed that the conspiracy was neither organized by organized crime nor by anti- Castro groups but could not rule out members of those groups working together. The HSCA conducted its work mostly in secret and much of the evidence (again) was sealed for 50 years under Congressional rules.

3. >>>In 1992 Congress created the Assassination Records Review Board with a last report on the 30th of September 1998, the day ARRB went out of existence. The ARRB was supposed perhaps to renew US citizens trust in their government, but the scope of the mission was limited.   T. Jeremy Gunn was the Executive Director and General Counsel of the ARRB. The Board from its final 236 – page report concluded that still aggressive efforts were required to pursue more information and the general concern was that still “critical records may have been withheld” from its vigorous efforts to come closer to the truth. By law this Agency was required to close its doors.

The ARRB did not re-investigate the JFK assassination (as this was not the aim), however in its search for further records it did conduct many interviews revealing new links and insights into various government operations which many federal agencies would prefer to keep out of the public’s eyes.

The ARRB had deficiencies as well by e.g. not subpoena Thomas Evan Robinson. He was one of the JFK embalmers and handwritten notes of a May 26,1992 conversation with Certified Legal Investigator Joe West were found in Joe West’s Investigator’s Notebook following West’s death in 1993. The transcript of those notes do provide further evidence that the autopsy report of JFK was falsified, adding to the conclusion that the conspiracy in the cover up was very widespread. In 1997 the ARRB interviewed the government employee who developed JFK’s autopsy photographs after his murder and she disputed each picture from the set of autopsy photo’s in the National Archives.

The ARRB documents show the planned phase withdrawal of American Forces from Vietnam by President Kennedy and the fact that the plan was immediately reversed after his assassination.

Though the ARRB did do a thorough job, the report does not reflect any of the stunning revelations contained in various declassified files under their review. Copies of the release of the grand jury records and the prosecution files were only available for public inspection from 9 am to 5 pm on the 12th of June 1998 at the Public Reading Room at the ARRB, 600 E Street, NW,Second Floor Washington, DC.20530. Thereafter the records were transferred to the JFK Collection at the National Archives and Records Administration in College Park, Maryland.

Still the assassination on President J.F. Kennedy “officially” remained shrouded in both mystery and secrecy, compounded by series of Governments penchant for secrecy. Generally spoken government secrecy has been harmful for both the confidence and truthfulness of federal agencies.  The ARRB needless to say was a firm step in the right direction, but there was still lack of access as agencies still considered release of further records too sensitive to open to the public.

Less than 50 years after the JFK assassination systems of government and/or agencies still prevent renewed investigations in the JFK assassination. It seems a step by step approach in which every decade perhaps more truth is allowed to be revealed, however not everything will be made public. Not even after 2017.

The powers behind the Executive Branch of the US Government are so powerful that it almost seems they are more powerful than the Presidency itself.

8.Within context it would seem that the US  Military and Intelligence Apparatus could not allow the JFK presidency to be continued. Hence the dramatic intervention in Dallas on the 22nd of November 1963.  This truth needed to continue to be concealed as it would compromise any trust in future US Governments and it’s Agencies.

Just before he died former US President Gerald Ford reflected in his memoirs that the CIA was involved in the JFK assassination, but he never went in detail on the extend of this involvement. This has been mentioned before but it is revealing

Former President Nixon on one of the “Watergate tapes” stated that the Warren Commission report was “the greatest hoax that has ever been perpetuated”. He did not went into detail why he questioned the report. Obviously not in the presence tape recordings.

Roger Stone, one of Nixon’s former aides, reflected in his recent book that Lyndon Johnson micro-managed Kennedy’s Dallas motorcade, insisting that it would pass through Dealy Plaza on the afternoon he was shot. This has been earlier reflected in a different context. Read more about this: https://www.google.com.au/#q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Fnews%2Farticle-2322981%2FFormer-Nixon-aide-claims-evidence-Lyndon-B-Johnson-arranged-John-F-Kennedys-assassination-new-book.html

–

Hence full disclosure and new  independent investigation in the JFK assassination is required to show the dangers which are a threat to the US as a democracy. Like the Zapruder Film again showed that the last fatal shot came from a total different direction than the Warren Commission claimed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0tZFkVhN00

 , – the official 9/11 Government Investigations again never explained the unexplained collapse of tower 7 (WTC7)  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zv7BImVvEyk

WTC7 again did contain many case files for ongoing investigations. Some three to four thousand files were destroyed. WTC 7 housed many private tenants including e.g. the CIA, the SEC, the IRS, the EEOC and the US Secret Service.

This article once more is not about 9/11 but about the issue that the truth about major (and likely Government related) criminal events in US history are kept away from public knowledge, and this includes the JFK assassination. No country or Government serves itself by accepting major crimes from the past by misleading the public it needs to serve.

In 2013 there was  the 50th anniversary of  the JFK assassination and a whole nation came together to remember the far-reaching events in Dallas on the 22nd of November 1963.

President John F Kennedy once said:

“The very word “secrecy” is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know.”

Abraham Lincoln once reflected:  > “America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves”.

It was just 100 years later that JFK concluded:  >”A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehoods in an open market is a nation afraid of its people.”<

“Love is the soul of genius”, –  as one would say. Without heart no genius. The way the US Constitution has been applied in both the 9/11 drama and the JFK assassination showed neither love, nor genius, nor even “heart”. The “show” for those who did know and still do know more, has been going on until almost even 50 years after Dallas and still it does not seem to stop.

Some countries prefer to live with certain lies, even when it affects the application of the Constitution in major crimes from the relatively past. Even in the days when the future looks better under the Obama Administration. 

However not dealing with the past has the risk of repetitive events in the future under different US Presidential Administrations.

Facing the facts with love for the historical US truth may enhance the Constitution and “The Union” rather than compromising it.

Whilst there are many things far more important and pressing in the present, the past should not be forgotten. Fifty years down the line people in the US may even know more, – however without the powers to change things for the better as that opportunity then has gone.

Courage not served is both courage and truth forgotten!

–

Thank you!

 Paul 

–
Paul Alexander Wolf

–

Challenges of our times and generation

–

 

 

For those being interested in more material related to this particular article below can be found some  supportive material, – including “video” details etc ->>>>>>>>>>>>

–

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7j5xgNH-P6M&feature=player_detailpage

(LBJ involvement in JFK assassination)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJIb73SPzkE&feature=player_detailpage

(Nixox joking about LBJ involvement, however was Nixon involved as well?)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-y2KQvvYtg&feature=player_detailpage

(Watergate could open “Bay of Pigs” and Kennedy assassination)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loM1uaVOXTA&feature=player_detailpage

Reasons behind Watergate

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPxz8vA6f2I&feature=player_detailpage

Gerald Ford: “The National nightmare is over…”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eZfS-oly10&feature=player_detailpage

Gerald Ford admits CIA involvement in the JFK assassination before his death.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ua45otjKpw&feature=player_detailpage

Baker on Bush Senior & JFK assassination

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gM9TssOt5RE&feature=player_detailpage

LBJ Coup against JFK, Military Industrial Complex Profits from war in Vietnam

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcHwMqc5pTA&feature=player_detailpage

George H.W.Bush connected to JFK assassination

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bD4611qW6R8&feature=player_detailpage

(E. Howard Hunt implicating LBJ, various editions about Howard Hunt)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2b70OKzL1M&feature=player_detailpage

(CIA, NWO involvement in the JFK assassination)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XY02Qkuc_f8&feature=player_detailpage

(Secret Service Stand down, – as clear as it !)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0xiAYAHFM0&feature=player_detailpage

(CIA, Military involvement assassination)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adG7WAXHMgw&feature=player_detailpage

( Courageous ex- FBI members re the killer James Files, who fired the fatal head wound)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdsXe0cpNFo&feature=player_detailpage

(James Files speaks and admits many years later, – he received his orders)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUecqrHoj3I&feature=player_detailpage

(Howard Hunt’s confession about his involvement in the JFK assassination. Hunt was involved in Watergate as well)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ATbhCUZxjQ&feature=player_detailpage

(Edward Lansdale, Military & CIA involvement in the JFK assassination)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGFilkbzfZ4&feature=player_detailpage

(Double Cross Giancana and the Kennedy’s, the Mafia connection)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79lOKs0Kr_Y&feature=player_detailpage

(LBJ’s Mistress blows the whistle about Johnson’s knowledge about the JFK assassination before it happened)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiMCd-iSndo&feature=player_detailpage

(Ted Sorensen: JFK was “implored” to go to Texas)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96FDflK_Iug&feature=player_detailpage

JFK deathbed confession – Jesse Ventura

 

Related articles on the JFK assassination:

• The JFK Assassination and the Gangster Nature of the State_on Anti-War Progressive Teach-in (noliesradio.org)
• Six JFK-Assassination Skeptics (nation.time.com)
• JFK assassination: Alistair Cooke’s dispatches for the Guardian (theguardian.com)
• Half A Century Past JFK’s Assassination, Camelot’s Fall, Still Only Dark Truths (everything-pr.com)
• JFK Assassination Documents on Display (wgno.com)
• 50th Anniversary of the JFK Assassination in Dallas TX (wearechange.org)
• JFK assassination: Alistair Cooke’s dispatches for the Guardian (theguardian.com)
• The JFK Assassination: The Impossible “Assassin”. Defending the Gangster State (rinf.com)
• Fifty years later, J.F.K.’s assassination is the mother of all conspiracy theories – NorthJersey.com (northjersey.com)
• Popovich on JFK Assassination: ‘I’ve always wondered what would have happened with Vietnam’ (mysanantonio.com)
• JFK assassination intertwined with Project Northwoods – Andrew Kreig (voiceofrussia.com)
• These 6 People Are Still JFK Assassination Skeptics (nation.time.com)

Related articles

• 7 interesting details you might have forgotten about the JFK assassination (miamiherald.com)
• The JFK Assassination and the Gangster Nature of the State_on Anti-War Progressive Teach-in (noliesradio.org)
• Half A Century Past JFK’s Assassination, Camelot’s Fall, Still Only Dark Truths (everything-pr.com)
• JFK Assassination Documents on Display (wgno.com)
• Popovich on JFK Assassination: ‘I’ve always wondered what would have happened with Vietnam’ (mysanantonio.com)
• JFK assassination intertwined with Project Northwoods – Andrew Kreig (voiceofrussia.com)
• JFK Assassination: New Motorcade Footage Could Challenge Lone-Gunman Theory (Exclusive) (thewrap.com)
• JFK assassinated by US 1% War Criminals: 4 powerful learning resources (examiner.com)
• JFK assassinated by US 1% War Criminals: 4 powerful resources (thedailyblogreport.wordpress.com)
• A JFK assassination book that stays away from conspiracies? (ask.metafilter.com)

Related articles

• RFK killer moved to new prison on anniversary of JFK assassination (theguardian.com)
• Fascinated with the JFK assassination? There is an app for it. (womenlovetech.com)
• JFK assassination intertwined with Project Northwoods – Andrew Kreig (voiceofrussia.com)
• Popovich on JFK Assassination: ‘I’ve always wondered what would have happened with Vietnam’ (mysanantonio.com)
• How to tell if what you’re reading or watching is still part of the JFK assassination cover-up. (obrag.org)
• Behind the Scenes With JFK (nation.time.com)
• The JFK Collection: Eight Films – DVD Review (historynet.com)
• How The World’s Newspapers Reported JFK’s Assassination (huffingtonpost.com)
• JFK Assassination – An Interview With FBI Informant Jack Van Laningham (planet.infowars.com)
• The state of the JFK case in 2014 (jfkfacts.org)

 

Both International And National Security Starts At Home – US in the picture.

“I have not seen anywhere else in the world a gun lobby that has the same level of influence on its own government as the NRA does in the United States.”    –Andrew Feinstein.

–

“I am concerned for the security of our great Nation; not so much because of any threat from without, but because of insidious forces working from within.” – Douglas MacArthur.

–

“The ignorance of one voter in a democracy impairs the security of all” – John F. Kennedy

–

The topic for today is the importance  of both increased national and international security and the nature of leadership we need in a changing world. However the focus will be on the first one, with an example of things starting at home in the US. Both with proper legislation and law enforcement within the domain and control  of US Congress. The US here is just an example and different examples do exist all over the world.

When times are economical challenging, foreign policy matters are rarely the topic of discussion. But in recent weeks issues on both foreign policy and security worked their way up within the public domain of attention.

During the crisis with North Korea in which China played for certain a role of influence for the better, – we had first the Boston Marathon bombings with the related questions about terrorist connections.  This is relatively a new element that from areas where you don’t expect it, people find their way on US ground and evolve in personalities able to prepare bombs with the intention to kill indiscriminately. And so they did, as others may do again anywhere.  Both inside the US and outside the US.

Whilst the airliner plot over the Atlantic and  World Trade Centre attacks are unlikely to happen anymore in the identity as they evolved, – the prospect of terror from a different kind seems to be more of an issue in the future.

It is terror of a different kind than 9/11. But it is the terror on top of increased gun violence in the US anyway, and from both sides of the spectrum there is easy access to guns, assault weapons and other tools to inflict destruction.

It’s a warning that dynamics in society are changing and that we need to be mindful of the fact that we are simply not ready for this.

Proper legislation in line with the spirit of our time and similar law enforcement need to be in place.  This being prepared in a proactive way by anticipation on the dynamics in society.

Within those recent dynamics in the US the civil war in Syria did break the news with a high index of suspicion of chemical warfare being used against the opposition in Syria. This followed by an Israeli bombing near Damascus to prevent the transport of missiles and chemical weapons close to the borders of Israel.

At the same time Congressional hearings in the US provided more detail about what happened in Libya when the US ambassador Christopher Stevens and other Americans were murdered during a terrorist attack. Lacking the total picture, some Republicans claim that the White House should be held responsible for either insufficient protection or misleading information.  It would seem that the dynamics within the domain of some Republican members of US Congress go that far that they would like any effort to try to impeach President Obama on this issue, if they could.  A reflection of a “House Divided” where some members of this honourable branch of Government lost touch with both reality and the priorities of this country.

It illustrates the dangerous paradox in this country, the downfall of democracy when Congress is misaligned on some major topics and obstructive elements are able to block progress against the will of the majority of voters.

This is not new and it may happen anywhere in countries with democracies. It might be considered as the play game of democracy but in some events it’s a dangerous play game setting the tone for more little fruitful dynamics in society…

Whilst not proven perhaps, there is more chance a society at peace or stable in itself at times of peace, – will sustain the disharmony at times of no peace better than the kind of society already divided in itself.

It illustrates somehow as well the sad thing that people often tend to stick together in crisis only, but go their own way when there are no dangers on the horizon.

We live however in a world where simple escalating events may lead to massive drama’s all around.

For this reason the  topic to be discussed today is an interesting one as the perceptions about leadership, democracy and security are almost as different as the dimensions about security and leadership on its own. Issues about eg Israeli’s and Palestinian security have different perceptions all around the world. History shows that people can make a difference within certain positions.

Interestingly we had recently 2 US Presidential candidates with different perceptions and personalities. The person who started his US Presidency in 2009 was able to continue in 2013.  The perceptions of one leader and the choices being made on behalf of international security may define the outcome of many future dynamics. Likewise within the US,  US Congress may define the outcome on other dynamics.

It’s a matter of leadership and being proactive, with inclusive views.

The nature of fast growing  and increasing  economic and financial interdependence of countries around the world, with all sorts of growing  interactions, –  need a far stricter international security than ever before.  It all starts in home land activities, to get grip on those things we don’t want, those things being disruptive for our well-being in the countries where we live, – the things affecting national security.  An issue for all of us, wherever we may live.

Both National and International security are in ways connected.

Speaking about security at a challenging time in US history, we only need to look back some 150 years ago.

A time where US Congress and legislative issues paved the way for the dynamics leading to the US civil war in the 18th Century.

President Lincoln would not have been the person history remembers if he would not have been challenged after his Presidential election to lead his country through one of the most difficult times in US history.

He was the unexpected President exposed to the worst, which through a combination of circumstances made him the best!

Some would say that the American civil war in those day  was a security and a significant emancipation issue for the US as a Union.

Emancipation still to be remembered, still to be remembered by those members of the Republican Party who are unable to see that emancipation and  inclusive progresses are ongoing issues in history. Running behind the important social and political events of time will catch up with those who have to deal with the implications in the future. History learns that not being proactive comes at a cost.

Being true what he said in his inauguration, President Lincoln did not allow a minority to disintegrate the Union, –   but he preserved the Union, by which he followed through with his planned declaration of Emancipation to end slavery.

He succeeded as part of the Republican movement at the time to create the next endeavour in US history, keeping the right balance on the required issues of national security in his days.

Whilst generally Southern Democrats were obstacles for Emancipation in the 1860 ties, – Northern Republicans are generally stumbling blocks for 21st  Century US progress. Both with exceptions within  each party in the days of President Lincoln and today. True is that the Republicans were the driving force for progress  one and half century ago.

Republicans should take this on board.

The last still in a most divided America.

Congressional choices long ago by overturning the so-called Missouri compromise which intended to restrict slavery, played part in the  evolving drama in the 1860ties, before it actually happened.

Today we jump a fair bit in time. To illustrate that divisions can go one way or the other but unresolved within the required legislation will lead to all sorts of processes in society hard to contain.

Also an issue subject to  Congressional choice.  The choice either being proactive or reactive.

It is not long ago  the National Rifle Association moved to block a UN treaty on gun control. The NRF serves strongly the interest of both national and international arms deals, with a high level of influence in US Congress.  Clear is that  US Congress has been willing to serve the power position  of the NRA by simply not approving Presidential proposals to revise gun legislation. The majority however of US voters wants a change in the current legislation on gun control as increasing gun violence disrupts a nation and may compromise eventually national security, the last because the current legislation is not aligned with changing dynamics in US society with more gun related violence and deaths, – both at the cost of children and adults.

.

Whilst some 700000 people died during the American civil war at the time of President Lincoln,- more even died as a result of unlawful gun use in the US over various decades.

The downfall of a democracy is that a minority may act against the will of the constitutional rights of voters. Voters to have their voice  properly represented in the legislation a country deserves.  It is true that the ignorance of a few voters – in the words of John F Kennedy –  may impair the security of all. In some cases the security of a Republic.

Congressional ignorance on the issue of gun control may disregard national security interest where it comes to the protection of US citizens. Voters want to reduce the risk  of more generalised and increasing gun violence in the US as the extremes will come together in the context of changing social dynamics. The last  as part of increased globalisation. Congress is not allowing those facts to be considered within the concept of national interest and as such  tolerating  the death toll of existing gun violence, –  eventually debilitating the US ability to keep control in own house. Getting worse when the forces of external terrorism meet existing dynamics in US society with more or less free access to unrestricted guns and assault rifles, enabling massacres at large scale.

A matter of national security.

Congressional choices may define future dynamics whilst the US President is almost powerless to change this at a time this being required.

It’s a matter of poorly understood national security of the United States of America. The dynamics of society turning into  increasing and senseless massacres, – the last often caused by  ill minded and mentally disrupted people from which the statistics say they are only on the increase.  Meanwhile US Congress allowing to be influenced more by NRA interest, and not  taking the dynamics in society or the wishes of voters on board.

Douglas MacArthur within a different context reflected once his concern for his own great Nation; “not so much because of any threat from without, but because of the insidious forces working from within”.

He was right in one sense, but today the danger comes from 2 directions, – both from threats within and without,  and with the current Congressional attitude towards increased gun control as is today, – this is a potential menace to the security of the Union.

Lincoln would have turned away from this, – if he could!   It is a matter of emancipation, constitutional emancipation.

Where history changed with new dilemma’s to be sorted, – the ask of true leadership is more profoundly needed all over the world.

But it all starts at home to have the required legislation and law enforcement in place.

We are faced with different dilemma’s this century.

True leadership is required today when the proper balance gets disrupted with lots of things being at stake. And often as it proved in history it falls back on people with a distinct personality and attitude, – bright in their assessment and determined in their actions.

The last applies for US Congress as well. An honest and fair assessment being required, both based on the choice of people being represented and the dynamics in society.

If we speak about the issue of security in a broader sense:

Not only  increased globalization is asking for stricter national and international security, but also  a new political economy with shifting influence from west to east and a population growth hardly possible to sustain, – with an increased unstable relationship between our fragile global civilisation and an increased depletion of our resources.

The last will become vital in the future.

Hence from an international perspective, international security in the Asia-Pacific region can’t be allowed to be compromised by nuclear dictators as eg in North Korea.

Similarly US security can’t be compromised by increasing gun violence inflicted by more  people turning their hatred on society,  with the same easy access to guns and rifles because Congressional legislation did not follow the trend in society.

Rifles and gun’s being far more advanced than when the Constitution was written. Dynamics within society and international far more different than they have ever been. The US more at edge than ever before.

The issues of both national and international security are getting more important as more things can go wrong at the same time with wider implications faster speed and greater destruction and disruption.

Without the right tools, the right brains and the best possible  assessment, – we lose both momentum and direction for a more stable world.

And again it all starts at home.

If we look at the Middle East, the situation in Syria is a prime example of major dangers and the potential of an escalating conflict. Civilisation and reason totally lost.

There have been dangers and evils in the past, so will there be evils and dangers in the future and we need to recognise them at an early stage.

When Lincoln made his Emancipation declaration amidst the American Civil war, – it took still hundred years before the Civil Rights movement got its way into proper and equal legislation for each American citizen.

I hope the desired emancipation on gun control and the required restrictions on gun related violence will not take an other 50 years in the US.  It would be a massive drain on society, both for victims and their families, but also for those who have to work in authority within the given restrictions of  incomplete gun legislation.

People in the police force have families as well.

Fortunately there is no room for racial hatred anymore, but whilst the last  belongs largely to the past new issues of friction and potential hatred arise at the spectrum of social development, – with mixture of cultures and religions, and increased travel from various countries around the world.

Being multicultural in one sense is good and has the potential to bring the goodness of different nations together. The downfall could be when people from poverty stricken area’s in today’s world travel at different countries, – with at times the narrow and restricted perception of only blind hatred. Receiving in some occasions terrorist training in their homeland of origin,  with a mission to destruct and destroy.

Alqaida has eg booklets designed to help terrorists overseas to make bombs and strike and kill in various ways. The target quite often seems to be the US  and its allies.

We might be horrified to know of what is possible to happen, – but most of us get horrified when it happens. Whilst we need to love our neighbour as ourselves, we have to denounce the persons and groups inflicting violence and terrorism. Similar with countries deliberately exporting this sort of people or ideology to be held accountable in line with international law, – the last subject for renewal and change at various levels to combat the dangers of our time.

But again it starts at home.

Insufficient restrictions on international nuclear control and allowing more countries to have access to nuclear weapons by lack of internal law enforcement is asking for more dictators or other countries “pulling the trigger”, – like allowing more people in the US to have access to lethal rifles and other dangerous guns, – is asking for a more unstable society, – creating a situation with potential “mass pulling of triggers” where the US army may have to act against its own citizens at times of national unrest.

 It seems correct that the Bush Administration prepared for FEMA concentration camps in case of social unrest. More important is that the triggers for social unrest never escalate in the use of massive gun violence in one society, – just for the sake of civilisation and protection of citizens. The law simply needs to be adapted to prevent an almost unlimited access is some States.

Again a matter of Congressional choice, but it would not seem they see it this way with some members of this establishment even devoted to get the Obama Administration down on what happened in Benghazi, Libya. Not being able to take the long view but using the short-sighted view to debilitate proper Governance at a time this being required makes jurisdiction stagnant.

 

Just an illustration how members of Congress can add to a “House divided” by not getting the priorities right.

It happened in the past, with US civil war just 150 years ago. It is for some part up to Congress to prevent this ever happening again by reducing increasing gun violence in a similar divided nation on different issues by proper legislation in line with the spirit of time.

With eg the Boston bombing just recently behind, an alleged terrorist rail  plot being foiled in Canada, sarin – gas being possibly used in Syria, and North Korea “one click away” from pushing the launch button of firing ballistic missiles, – it is clear that changing international patterns are evolving into more risk involving scenario’s waiting to become reality. both national and international.

This is what I mean when I say that at some stage  the extremes are coming together, both from outside the country and inside the country.

At the end of the day the means to have control is largely a  matter of the right legislation being in place with the proper law enforcement and the proper people right for our time. This both applies at the arena of national and international politics.

National Security starts at home and coming back on the US, Congress should act in favour of increased gun control.

A matter of civilised and effective legislation to support both national security and the safety of US citizens.

On the extremes outside – and within the context of international security and coöperation against terrorism  – it is  encouraging that President Putin from Russia emphasised the need for increased international intelligence coöperation,  as prevention at an early stage is the better substitute.

G8 summit in Ireland, June 17, 2013

Some nations posses the power to abolish any form of human poverty but also any form of human live.  Both  a matter of responsibility and choice, – a matter actually of priority to support any extended nuclear freeze proposals,  and contain the current level of nuclear experience where it comes to the development of new weapons of mass destruction.

Whilst most nations appreciate the responsibilities on this and have already reduced their nuclear arsenals, new powers arise with the wish to have those weapons as well, – and with a clear intent to either use them or apply international blackmail.

Those countries are an issue of serious concern. They need to be stopped at the earliest possible stage through reason and if reason and sanctions do not help, through force if so required, – in line with international coöperation by those nations committed to stop the dangers to multiply.

The UN plays a central role.

International security on this is based on the practical choice not to allow any new country to develop those weapons, – regardless the question whether it is good or wrong that other countries do already  have those weapons. It is clear that with increasing countries having access to nuclear or chemical weapons it is getting more difficult to keep the world secure.

Same applies with providing at times even more unpredictable people an almost free access to fire arms, – as such creating increasing difficulties to prevent massacres of any kind as result of gun violence, the last with a potential domino effect.

Stable we can make it through more succesful partnerships on the issues we face in the 21st century. US Congress is not much familiar with succesful partnerships on this issue of restricting gun violence.

Science is able to unleash the powers of destruction by human choice, unless we prevent humankind and powers to make this choice, – by restricting at least the powers who are able to destruct each other.  Most of them who are nuclear now do realise that the choice of such destruction means self-destruction,  involving all humanity.

Likewise science provides terrorists the means to unleash powers of more limited destruction, both by senseless shootings or bomb blasts at areas of their choice. However the means by which terrorists are able to apply this destruction in the future is by no means sure and increased international coöperation is required to recognise at an early stage the features of certain persons and groups committed to terror

Whether terror is provoked or inflicted by guns or bombs makes in essence not much difference when we consider the lethal outcome on both children and adults. School shootings where people die are as terrible as disrupted sport events where people are killed through the hands of terrorists using bombs. Those tools need to be be banned from the street with the restriction (if the Constitution can’t be changed as yet) of gun’s being controlled, registered and only in the hands of mindful people, – and assault rifles being excluded in any case for “civil use”.

We live in a world insufficient prepared for terrorism, – which does not mean we have to learn to live with terrorism as if this would be our fate.

 

Both National and International security starts at home in our own countries with the things we can control, with proper legislation and law enforcement on issues being required in the context of changes in society, changes in the way children are brought up and the way they become adults, apart from the changes related with globalization and the technology which brings people down from different countries.

Whilst it is hard to change or control the mindset to take lives for no reason, it is easier to control or limit the means by which we are able to do this.

This applies both to guns and nuclear weapons, –  and it all starts at home where we are privileged to make choices on restricting the tools and dynamics of violence.

US Congress should reconsider the issue of effective gun legislation for the benefit of a more secure society where people are becoming slowly less at risk of violence as due to unlawful use of bullets, – regardless whether those bullets come from US citizens or people who travel from overseas to inflict violence for the reason of hatred against US society.

Waiting for escalating gun violence in the future, wherever it comes from, is pointless. The warnings are there, written already in the hearts of many people who lost loved ones in this repetitive cycle of non-required violence, –  waiting to get worse only.

We have neither right to inflict suffering nor death on another human being unless there is an unavoidable necessity for it and any culture or country which endorses the right to bear arms amongst it citizens has blood on the law provision it provides on this and will pay at later date a price being higher than initially intended at the time those laws were made.

The clause on the right to bear arms in the US Constitution is a serious defect considering the time spirit of the 21st Century and lays the foundation of the potential destruction of it’s culture through internal destructive forces, – if not adapted.

Thanks!

 Paul 

–
Paul Alexander Wolf

–

https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2013/01/06/we-dream-of-things-that-never-were-and-say-why-not/

 

Related articles

• How Hollywood cloaked South Sudan in celebrity and fell for the ‘big lie’ (theguardian.com)
• Review: My 2013 Predictions (throughthefringe.wordpress.com)
• Sen. Bernie Sanders: 2014: Seize the Moment (huffingtonpost.com)
• Who Legalized Arming Black Men to Kill Confederates? (theroot.com)
• Seize the Moment (counterinformation.wordpress.com)
• Yearly Review (harpers.org)
• The Destabilization of Africa. A Machiavellian Intrigue of Colossal Proportions (rinf.com)
• The Destabilization of Africa. A Machiavellian Intrigue of Colossal Proportions (libya360.wordpress.com)
• A Year-End Security Review Of Southern Asia – Analysis (eurasiareview.com)
• The Destabilization of Africa. A Machiavellian Intrigue of Colossal Proportions (therebel.org)

 

The Question Of Character And Courage

“Courage is the discovery that you may not win, and trying when you know you can lose”
–Tom Krause

–>>

…We thought about it and we spoke about it for many years already and It has gone through our minds, perhaps someway for ages.

Not for everybody but for some.

Often we did see the examples in day to day life and we admired them wishing it could be our own, – less often we did read about it, in the papers or in some books perhaps, – besides from what we were able to see on TV, in documentaries or on DVD‘s

Do you remember the question going through your heart and mind as well?

Did we fail at times that we were running low and progress was slow, did we fail at the times we forgot about it as things seemed well, and there was perhaps no reason to ask again, – or to raise again the issue of character and courage?

We like to be of good character or want to be seen as such. We like to have courage and faith but there are moments we fail in both courage and good character. Not that those incidents give a fair assessment on the total of our actions, – but simply the fact is that we are never always good in character, or always good in showing courage.

Is this an “open door”?

Yes, – it is, as trying to get to the bottom of the question of character and courage a fair assessment is required.

We like to be true to ourselves as well, but not always are we true to our real self. As I said once, freedom and choice are indivisible and need to be earned and conquered each day,each week and each month, – and the sum of those efforts may work in favour of both our character and our courage. Both courage and character are indivisible as well, – like so many things are related or interrelated.

Whilst the secret of happiness is perhaps freedom, using the gift of choice the greatest potential, – the secret of freedom is courage. The last implying being able to make the right choice under any circumstances.

A matter of character as well.

For sure any of us will have our weak moments as long as we raise when the storm sets in, – even when the storm imposes a strain or challenge on our position or principles, – when it imposes a risk for ourselves, our future and other things perhaps. When the storm comes the leaves may fly away as long as the tree stands firm, and when the storm settles, like so many storms, – the tree may start a new season as no storm will leave nature unmoved. It’s part of life, – it depends how we are grounded, being firm in our convictions or weak in our principles.

There are many small actions of character and courage, often shown when “we feel like it” or were “in the frame of mind” to do so.

Those actions are neither dramatic or huge as the actions of those leaders who at the right frame of mind, at both the right place and the right time in history, were able to turn events in favour of greater change for humanity, – nor are they as dramatic as the courage of the last moments when we are facing death.

Speaking about the very last, – this crossed my mind when a young woman in her 40ties got cancer. Her family around her and her older sister were there when her time came. They had their memories, laughter and sadness, but when she died it could be seen that she went back to her own Creator. She took her death with peace as she knew she went back where we all came from, despite the agony and pain at times. When this happens in your family, losing loved ones at young age, – you realise there are only a few things in life which really matter. It’s a small thing only to have been able in life to enjoy the sun, a small thing to have lived light in the spring, – to have both loved and done when we “leave our footprints on the sands of time.” And even those footprints will be wiped away as time evolves and little will be remembered, unless we showed both great love and courage. In this it’s all about the courage to love , the courage to live and the courage to leave a legacy, – besides the courage to face death when the last is facing us.

So courage again, in general, is important, – but the courage to love as well, the compassion of doing the things being both right and good at every point of testing. The courage to live life in such away as if every day could be the last one. This takes besides having a mental alertness to have courage, both in the simple things but in particular at times of adversity, at times meeting the facts of life, at times when it is required to go straight at things without dodging them. It means as well we have to pick up or seize the vital issue in a complex matter, without getting wounded by running away from it.

Long before he became US President, John F Kennedy did write a book about “Profiles in Courage“. A study of men in the historical and political arena of the US where they stood firm on their principles at times of challenge in either the US Senate or the House of Representatives (apart from some other area’s), – at times when crucial decisions were due to be made and the balance between conscious and public opinion or “public favour” were tense, at times when both the public and colleagues were hostile.

Courage is not about the past, it is about the future, – and therefore the examples of courage are so important.

So many examples!

The soldiers who save their mates at the battlefield at risk for their own lives, the people fighting for human rights and going into areas and questioning the areas of controversy at risk for their lives, the courage to stand up when it is required for either a good cause or in a speech when the real issues need to be challenged. But also the people who stand out to help those at times of disaster, – bushfires, massive flooding and earthquakes etc, – all often not without risk for own life.

The “New Frontiers” of Kennedy were neither East nor West, neither South nor North, – but in his own time as US President where he fronted the facts as they were. At the level of President Obama we find an untroubled spirit who tends to look at things in the face as how he meet them, and know them for what they are, – dealing with them at the right time and place.

Courage, – the combination of bravery at times, integrity more at times, – based on principles. And life is the arena where we are tested on those virtues, each of us at times under excessive pressure, rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation and constant in praying, – for those who pray within the silence of our Creator.

This is one of the dimensions of courage.

As Bob Greene once said: “You need to know what life you want (as well as what life you don’t want), then you have to muster up the will and the drive to go after it.”

This is courage as well.

Courage is like a diamond, “unbreakable”, with a hardness and the sort of light dispensing, – allowing to show people the various dimension of the light it reflects. As a gemstone it is a highly valued commodity, but courage in human life is an essential commodity, – not as highly traded perhaps but being graded as the one and only virtue at each testing point in life’s endeavours.

As the Roman poet Horace once wrote more than 2000 years ago: “Tomorrow we take our course once more over the mighty seas.”

It takes courage to do this, it takes courage to be the housewife with 4 children and going every day over the mighty seas of friction and care for loved ones, when the income is low and the prices are high.

Courage is “grace under pressure” as Ernest Hemingway once said, but it takes courage to raise the sails if the winds of grace are blowing, – and they don’t blow every day. At times it is easier said than done when the oil of daily life is going through our troubled sea of thoughts, as life may face some of us this way, – preventing to keep our mind smooth and equable.

Tough times can come when we are at our weakest point, and raising up to be the “unbreakable diamond” we want to be may arise at the worst possible times, as we may be discouraged as human beings as due to ongoing misery, – as due to staring at the water without being able to cross the sea.

Blessed are those who keep our hopes up in those circumstances.

The circumstances when we can’t get into the mountain ranges as due to the desert where human feet can’t go, – as due to the ends of unknown seas when neither wind nor sails are the tools we normally use to find direction. Human life has those circumstances where there is neither boat nor sails, neither the morning breeze at a blue ocean nor the sight of a destiny.

Perhaps it was once there, but for some it has gone from their sight, – those being depressed under the most horrendous circumstances of both poverty and abuse, – deprived from education and diminished in self-destructive perceptions.

That’s life, – a mixture of both tragedy and triumph, both with implications and expectations, both with dangers and failures all around.

But still, as once the 3rd  US President said: “One man with courage is a majority.”

From that point it is true that the courage of “one man standing up for an ideal” as Robert Kennedy once said, standing up to improve the lot of others, others who suffer the implications of injustice, – is an act of courage as well.

The courage of helping those with neither hope nor courage. The courage to send forth the implications of peace, against oppression and resistance. The courage to build up a current in which people can raise their tiny sails on restless boats, – to cross the barriers and waters they have to cross to build a life for their own, both with value and dignity.

“The world is a lost place” as some would say, – however not for those who judge themselves on the contributions they have to make, and the goals they have to shape, – to improve the lot of others.

And then when we have to face death ourselves as part of an eternal cycle, – the question is not how much money we made. The question is whether we tried “to love our neighbour as ourselves” and whether we made a genuine effort to improve the lot of those who really needed this.

Indeed, when we are going back from where we came, the only one Creator, – our time has gone, our attitude has gone, both our joy and abundance have gone, – but what stays in the twilight of memory, in the actions of people we had an impact on, is whether our private chart during our discovery on both the earth and the sea did contain the light of spring: that we have loved and done, that have done and loved.

This is what takes courage, – courage in sustained ways, but also the courage of the diamond with that single strong reflection which holds everything together, – by sharing it freely from our heart and spirit, in whatever life asks us to do in all those things we need to do.

This is a question of courage and character, a question of encouragement or discouragement, – the question or ask to be a sparkling light as we have the privilege of a free choice to be this way.

This is what matters most, the question of character and courage, – the matter of grace under pressure and the ability to make the right distinctions when the heat is on, – all this with wisdom and perseverance.

Thank you!

 Paul 

–
Paul Alexander Wolf

–

https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2013/01/06/we-dream-of-things-that-never-were-and-say-why-not/

 

Related articles

• change and courage…….. (fancythots.wordpress.com)
• Courage doesn’t… (victorialittle.wordpress.com)
• Finding the courage to enjoy social nudity (nickysworld.wordpress.com)
• & you need to be fearless… (andlivefreely.wordpress.com)
• 5 Emotional Strategies – 2014 (dietrying999.wordpress.com)
• On Courage, Vulnerability, and Just Being Human – Love removes us from our pedestal (soshitech.com)
• Israel boycott ‘courageous act’: Analyst (rinf.com)
• Courage (donnapiper.wordpress.com)
• Finding the courage to enjoy social nudity (portugalnaturista2020.wordpress.com)
• The Man From the North: Impossible Courage by Rivera Sun (dandelionsalad.wordpress.com)

 

We dream of things that never were and say: “Why not?”

Kennedy giving his speech on Martin Luther King, Jr.. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

“Never be bullied into silence. Never allow yourself to be made a victim. Accept no one’s definition of your life; define yourself.” — Robert Frost

–

“We must be willing to let go of the life we planned in order to have the life that is waiting for us.” — Joseph Campbell

–

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCrx_u3825g

–

“You see things; and you say ‘Why?’ But I dream things that never were; and I say ‘Why not?’” —George Bernard Shaw

Being asked at some stage why this blog had the pretentious title; “We dream about things that never were and say: why not?”, – I refer back to one of the plays of George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950) “Back to Methuselah“, which actually is a series of five plays on its own.

In “Back to Methuselah” the above quote is used by The Serpent to Eve in the Garden of Eden. The play was performed for the first time in New York City at the Garrick Theatre in 1922 and entailed for the time a most interesting science fiction fantasy which took three nights to do.

The former US Senator and assassinated Presidential Candidate Robert F Kennedy (1968) borrowed this quote and said it differently: “Some people see things as they are and say why? I dream things that never were and say, why not?”

Kennedy and Martin Luther King were the people at the forefront for change in the United States during the Vietnam War. Martin Luther King was assassinated just a couple of months before Robert Kennedy was killed.

The movement for change came to a standstill, the Vietnam War escalated, – social issues to be developed in the US were put on hold. The last until the movement for change embodied in President Barack Obama evolved into a new episode in US history, at a time crucial for various developments in the world.

If the further movement for change on issues of human rights, on Peace and International Stability requires to get stronger, and if the quote in above fiction play (from Bernard Shaw) is being allowed to embody a stronger emphasis, then the “I” part in the quote needs to be changed in the “We” part.

We are all strongly interdependent and if the “dream” in whatever entity resonates as a ripple effect across the generations, like the waves are coming and going but (!) always coming in terms of new energy, “We” may create a movement eventually which breaks the obstacles for Peace and stability, the obstacles to reduce poverty and keep the ingredients to protect this small planet against  climate changes and other disruptions of various nature.

We dream of things that never were and say: “Why not?”, reflects a shift in perception so to say.  A shift in thinking where new and better options are explored, new ways discovered. Where the creativity from the  right part of the  brain takes over the reactive activity from the  left side of the  brain, the last where those activities are not balanced in the actions of people. Actions which are not right and call for change. Actions which require passion and creative thought for peace and development.

Where conscious activities take over the activities from the mind, as it is not the mind which dictates the outcome of the future, the first determines then the outcome of our common activities.

Obviously we can do this as people in breaking with the past where this is required and at times we do this by choice, – using this gift we all have.

At the end it is not “I” it is “We”!

 

There is no pretentious aim in the title of this blog, – as it is not about “me”, it is about “We” as a people, “We” as people, “We” embodied in the future with plenty of issues to be resolved. “We” who bear both the seeds of potential and defeat.

Defeat we had, potential we need.

Far too often we see the scary demeanour of empty confidence and coolness in this world.

People who both often speak too noisy with overbearing pride. People often who build their lives at a cost of others, –the last not rarely with intolerance and suppression. We see this in families, our communities, in organisations where people are still able to manage from inflated principles, – and finally we see this in our country and many countries around us.

Often in “the culture” as well of our political systems, – whether they are democratic or the opposite.

The more suppression there is the more violence it may create, with violence creating retaliation and retaliation creating more violence, – whether this is the violence in our demeanour or the violence of a society.

Again and too often we see the sickness of not rarely whole societies, – with true respect for those who turn against it. And too often as well again we see the sickness of the souls of those people with the kind of sickness we are neither able to remove nor to heal.

What we can remove however is the hidden sickness of our own souls and shine as brightly as we can, – knowing that we don’t live in a perfect world. But the last thing which remains by free choice is trying to take away some part of the misery of humanity and this world, when it comes our way drop by drop and piece by piece, – either by coincidence or by choice.

In the final analysis as human beings, – we have the last choice. And again this is not about “Me or I”, but it is about “We”, – where the sum of our individual activities do help to call the trumpet of our collective activities. The last in alignment with a massive human orchestra, directed perhaps by those conductors representing global efforts in favour of increasing international coöperation on the issues of our time.

This part is not seeing things and standing by only, – and wondering “why?”. This is part of the active process of “Dreaming things that never were and say: Why not?” A creative and proactive activity, an ongoing movement for change where only “we” as a people can  make this change.

In the broader sense of the word it is a team effort of gigantic proportions, which does not fail when one of the leaders would be assassinated, but where the group activity would make sure that the anti-movement would be eliminated by the proper law enforcement which would be the fruit of our collective endeavours, – and the movement would endure, regardless death, which surrounds us day by day.

Whilst the reality of this world may make many of us pessimistic, – the power of being hopeful and believing in the potential goodness of human nature and going beyond the realities of ignorance and violence, – provides us with the seeds to “Dream things which never were and say: “Why not?”

So let us go forth therefore unto keeping the human spirit alive, against all odds.

Let us go forth into the field where we are able to touch the lives of others who walk in “the dark”, whether they are rich or poor, – whether they represent countries in regression or under repression. As both in our communities we are able to offer the peace which helps people to move forward and inevitably among countries as well, – we are able to support those who need guidance. Not the support of weapons, which only give destruction and not the provision of hope, – but the support to inhabit this planet within the range of our human destiny where forces against its survival can be controlled by the rational end of the human spirit.

The last to be shared with the vigilant efforts within our families, communities and finally between countries, – where law enforcement on peace, human rights and the protection of our environment is not impossible.

Not even impossible in times where annihilation still is possible, – when people can’t do without this enforcement on peaceful efforts to settle disputes of any kind.

Therefore we need to continue to dream things that never were and continue to say, – as acting we must: “Why not?” Each time and in each generation those efforts need to be renewed. Each time and in each generation new identities need to be evolved to combat the danger of evil spirits and evil movements, – whether it is organised crime or human trafficking, whether it applies to countries who foo the world or people who represent terrorist activities.

Where non-violence needs to be the universal aim, – violence can’t be always prevented as ready we need to be to combat the risks of greater destructions.

Never ever we will live in a perfect world. Never ever will there be an enduring peace as there is always the risk of conflict. But “We” as a people need to dream things to create the antidote for the evils of humanity, – which is an active process starting at the base of our own conscience in all our day to day activities where we have to make choices, where we have to make choices to make things better or bitter.

Therefore we have to dream things which never were and say” Why not?” Not because the people have to do it for us, but we have to do it for the people, for those who deserve our care and compassion.

Again lastly (I touched base on this before), the last responsibility we have as people is to remove the hidden sickness of our own souls. Either the sickness from the past or the present, which manifest itself in small and often unnoticed deeds. It’s a process of personal growth which means we need to leave certain things behind us and replace this by better things today and shine as such as brightly as we can.

After sustaining and surviving the most horrible experiments in 2nd WW concentration camps, –  it is as Victor Frankl once said about choice.

Indeed, at the end we have a free choice.

They can take away everything from us, and even at the last moment we have the final choice as how to respond or not respond at all anymore.

So neither death nor life needs to face us in the things we don’t understand, as long we play our own part on this little planet.

At the end nothing is terminal, everything is transitional, – even where death separates us from our duties here on earth.

But the duties continue in hopefully endless generations to come, each with its specific problems where man made problems need to be resolved.

And finally therefore the “We” part in saying we dream things that never were and say “Why not?” is so important, because the power of our collective dreams for a better world in action creates a ripple effect which can’t be stopped, – neither today nor tomorrow!

Thank you!

 Paul 

–
Paul Alexander Wolf

–

More results from wordpress.com »

–

https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2013/01/20/the-question-as-how-to-serve/

–

https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2013/12/06/rest-well-golden-eagle-in-memory-of-nelson-mandela/

–

https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2011/11/19/to-sweep-down-the-mightiest-walls-of-oppression-against-our-human-rights-and-create-the-biggest-movement-on-earth/

–

https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2013/01/11/peace/

–

https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2011/04/19/our-future-lies-in-our-children-as-well/

–

Challenges of our times and generation

–

Related articles

• An Englishman in New York (hiscoxusa.com)
• Letters to Writers – On Making Mistakes (G.B. Shaw) (contemplatinglove.com)
• George Bernard Shaw in his own words. (oneworldchronicle.com)
• Creating Oneself (aryasowl.wordpress.com)
• Dreams (christianmotivations.weebly.com)
• Unkind Postures of the Boss (spyghana.com)
• They’re All Mad (theburningplatform.com)
• Happy New Year!! (docreits.com)
• 365 Quotes to Inspire You in 2014 (inc.com)
• Everyone had a friend in Cynthia (muscatinejournal.com)

Some predictions for 2013 after 2012?

DAVOS/SWITZERLAND, 27JAN07 – John F. Kerry, Senator from Massachusetts (Democrat), USA captured during the session ‘The Future of the Middle East’ at the Annual Meeting 2007 of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, January 27, 2007. Copyright by World Economic Forum swiss-image.ch/Photo by Remy Steinegger (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

>”Don’t sweat the small stuff when so much else matters.”<

Predictions are not always easy and sometimes impossible. We have one certainty and this is that not nothing is certain. Our agenda for tomorrow based on today or yesterday may well work out, but sometimes it may get disrupted by the unexpected and we have to deal with things as they face us. The day may end differently than we expected, despite a good start perhaps and despite the fact that we assumed everything would by all right.

The same applies to predictions on a New Year, we hope for the best but nothing is certain. Same applies to the weather forecast. We may have good grounds to say it will be a sunny day tomorrow and go to the beach, but we may have to change plans as it proves to be a rainy day with a thunderstorm after eg a very humid day. Let’s be happy that the forecast that the world would end on the 20th of December was nonsense, nobody is able to predict those things.

In other words we may have our intentions but we are not sure whether they come true. Hence what I have to say about 2013 is based on assumptions, based on trends and certain facts perhaps but knowing as well that everything can be changed by the unexpected. In other words and if you like, read what is written below for your pleasure only. It is written by a country Physician, – so be on your guard as Physicians are not supposed to know anything about the future, not to speak about international developments. However what is said is not too difficult and perhaps we all know about it already. Besides this there is no pretension to be complete on those things as completeness on those things as far beyond our abilities.

2012 was for sure not the most dramatic year fortunately. As I said the world did not come to an end and for some this was a bonus, if they were aware of those predictions. Still there have been plenty of issues in 2012 with the seeds of events setting the scene for 2013. This includes eg the launch of a long-range rocket in North Korea, a country with just a new young leader.We had the conflict between Israel and Gaza, or actually as well the non – coöperation from Israel towards a new Palestinian State next door with still clearly significant Hamas impact and the potential of new rocket attacks from East Jerusalem, – if again a conflict situation. Hamas still being supported by Iran, not particularly Israels biggest ally so to say. We all know this. Nothing new. There has been always friction in this area.. Even in the Old Testament there were many reflections on struggle and endless fights. The problem now is that we have different means to start war’s. It’s a bit scary at times. Iran’s nuclear ambitions within this context are only adding oil on fear.

The ongoing civil war in Syria with endless killings and with the remote risk of escalation is an other example, and sadly spoken there is no reference for life at all in Syria (its leaders).. The only thing which is positive after the international community being tight into “non action” is that Russia is getting a bit over Syria with its troubles as well, which may aid international coöperation to end this pointless conflict, – based on a dictator hanging in for power. It’s a terrible example.

There are the current tensions between China and Japan about an absolute insignificant rock in the ocean, which means apparently enough for those countries to send Navy vessels to this direction. And we all hope that no idiot will start to sink a ship in this breeding conflict as little things can have major implications. However feel assured, neither the Chinese nor the Japanese are idiots, they need to show to their own people that they take this issue serious. However one may ask for what reason. One miscalculation or error in judgement may ruin plans. Interestingly Kennedy during the missile Cuba crisis in 1962 was at the end more concerned about his own Generals than about the leader of the Soviet Union at the time. Gives an indication perhaps that playing with fire may give unexpectedly a fire and sometimes a big one.

The continuation of Obama’s Presidency in 2013 may cause him more grey hairs, but his team approach will help to set the tone of international developments where both wisdom action and restraint are more balanced when the election outcome would have been differently. History has not always been that lucky.

Syrian dictator Assad still being in office with all the ongoing massacres will drive him into increasing isolation.Hopefully it is just a matter of time that international approval will help to stop the needless killings and extreme violence in this troubled country.The whole Middle East area is already troubled enough.

Needless to say that the Middle East will be most challenging in 2013, more so than in 2012. This since civilization festered area with religious hatred and conflict for certain will not easily find a harmonious solution for all parties involved. The most practical interim solution will be straight on US – Iran discussions to test Iran’s willingness to coöperate in multi part talks to restrict/reduce the chance of an escalating war without end.The emhasis should be to end all terror related violence as only this will encourage Israel to help the Palestinians into the developments needed with the protection of all people in the Israel/Gaza region.It is just wait and see whether it will go this direction, but it would be wise to include Iran subject to prove of genuine intentions to keep friendly relations with all neighbours in the area, including full safety guarantees for Israel.

It is amazing to see that the Euro crisis has been able to drag on for another year without a final conclusion. In December 2012 Greece is still in the Eurozone and different European countries are struggling with various intensity to stay straight, so to say. Unemployment ratio is increasing likewise the closure or reduction of various businesses. For many the belief in the Euro future is bleak with Germany however insisting that the Euro should survive. Needless to say that a potential fall of the Euro will have lots of implications for the people of Europe, but also for the nations with strong Euro connections.

Leadership changes took place in various countries during 2012 and generally spoken not much change can be expected immediately after those transitions. However, the leadership changes in both North Korea,China, Russia, Japan and other States will set the agenda for changing dynamics in 2013, with the inclusion at least of a stable and trustworthy foreign policy approach of the US under the same President with a good successor of Hilary Clinton as Secretary of State. John Kerry is a foreign policy expert and an impressive elder statesman in the US Senate. He will not need much “in-house training” to aid US foreign policy on critical issues in 2013.

The most important issue perhaps of being resolved at present is unfortunately financial . If both the US and Europe are unable to solve their issues with the required political will, it will enhance the weakening of the “western hemisphere” in almost every dimension. Fiscal cliffs or not, the balance between outgoing’s and innings need to be right. The current US deficit and the Federal Reserve printing heaps of money not backed by any “golden standard” or “oil” is asking for trouble down the line with the risk of a massive new recession.Utterly complex matters within the US not fully controlled need to be be managed or controlled by vigorous new legislation. Gun control is important and a public topic at present but the system of financial self-regulation is vital for the US to continue to exist in the way it does and not go down the road as the Roman empire once did. Some countries perhaps would be delighted with a reduction of US power, but the risk of a significant reduction of US power could destabilise the world and President’s Obama’s second term will be vital to face and deal with the issues as they are.The potential foreshadow of social unrest and increasing violence as a result of a possible second recession makes gun control even more significant to protect US citizens against itself. The potential destruction of the US not necessarily may come from the outside but can come from the inside and the years ahead are critical for the US. Inflation and possible recession are going hand in hand if no firm control on the Federal Reserve, but the powers behind this are significant and dealing with this is a risk for the US President. However what needs to be done needs to be done. At the end of the day it is all people’s work translated into energy, rewarded by money, – which is decreasing in value by the private control of creating money by the Federal Reserve. Man made problems can be resolved by men, only if the political will to support the required directions resonates through various legislative branches in both Europe and the US.Without any predictions being possible it is wait and see how the dynamis in this area will evolve in 2013, knowing that any international conflict could ruin the efforts of each country to solve its balance between spending and cutting costs in a way which protects those who have worked hard for their money, but also those who live from their superannuation, those who are disabled and fragile in society, the elderly and the children included. “Sometimes the wrong choices bring us to the right places.” as was once said by Nathan Pyle, – however I doubt this for 2013 (in no uncertain terms).. Increasing costs for food and energy against reduced value of our money is harmful wherever we may live on this world, and still the majority of people can’t afford it anymore and live below any reasonable standard of living.

Various countries in the Middle East will face the problem of opposing Islamist groups taking responsibility of taking Government as many Islamists have their own political frictions with the potential of increasing sectarian conflicts in the years laying ahead. Initial peaceful countries could turn quickly into new areas of intense conflict.

The US has renewed interest  in the Asian Pacific for both economical and security reasons after withdrawing from both Iraq and eventually in 2014 from Afghanistan, but the vacuüm created will have both Iran’s and India’s interest to have their perceived deserved share of influence. Also an area of different dynamics with an uncertain outcome at this stage after US withdrawal by the end of 2014.

It is anticipated that US dependence on oil exporting countries is going to reduce in quite sustained ways with significant “US dollar” issues. There is a tendency already of increasing countries less relying on the value of the US dollar with as final result (forgetting about a few other issues) that the US impact on foreign international policy may reduce in value and strength..

President Obama shortly in his second term will have greater influence to balance the critical important relationships between the US and China. The new President Xi from China needs to get agreement and support for a different set of policies in a rebalancing act on the Chines economy and the demands of some 350 million middle class people. The facts behind the conflict between Japan and China in the East Chines sea could be well that the Chinese government can’t afford to look weak. It is clear that the US has been worried about China for some time and it is not hoped that Japan might be forced to act in a very trivial conflict with apart from this the still contentious issues around Taiwan.

As we all know, words from leaders may lead to action and both feeding empty rhetoric and false sentiments besides fear, are unhelpful to balance the required coöperation between Washington and Beijing.Tha call for action goes together for the call for great care on both sides. Again note that it has been an international interest to have President Obama reelected as US “Commander-in-Chief”, even though a number of US citizens feel different about this.

Iran has been faced with various sanctions in 2012 together with increased inflation and unemployment.The desire of Iran to go nuclear and have potential weapons of mass destruction is going at a significant cost for Iran.It’s standing in the region as due to the Arab uprising is not as strong as it was before.It’s ally Syria is fully involved in a civil war and Israels insistence on a preëmptive attack may seem to have diminished somewhat, waiting what a second Obama term will deliver in terms of security for Israel. The question remains whether containment of a nuclear Iran is possible. Israel will still reconsider its options and in terms of US foreign policy it would be wise to test Iran on its willingness to have serious discussions on security matters in the Middle East area, including its place about Israel. If Israels security is without any doubt accepted it is neither in Israel’s interest nor intention to start a preëmptive war with Iran, but also this is a wait and see matter as how dynamics will evolve. Needless to say again that this is an area of both great concern and importance and proactive management from the US Administration is a need to keep the right balance as from other countries this can’t be expected, unfortunately. It’s a critical issue in US foreign policy in the Middle East and it would be hoped that John Kerry will be granted with a new US mission to explore the potential coöperation with Iran to balance US vital security interest in Israel, without a major Middle East war.

Climate change and the implications of Climate change, the protection against terrorism of any kind will remain high on the international agenda, likewise and hopefully increasingly the protection of human rights. The last often an issue of international lip service and a need being recognised but not often materialised where it proves to be required, including the issue of increasing human trafficking. Also in this domain we have to wait and see how international coöperation will work out, but at least a stable world will contribute and a world with increasing conflict will compromise, – any form of human rights! Hence the importance of the 2013 agenda that some countries are going to deal seriously with their own financial affairs as what we can learn from history is that the great depression of the 1930ties was one of the triggers of the second word war.

America’s stronghold as an economic power has been compromised in the past and it is by far nor sure this will be sorted in the future. A sudden recession or an unexpeced and escalating conflict could ruin each potential to overcome its problems if both leaders in Europe and the US are unable to get the required support to control internal economical dynamics not being sufficiently managed in the past. Fruitful international relationships are  of ongoing importance, which will be really the challenge of 2013 with a new generation of leaders in vital countries of potential conflict.

Far more to say about 2013, but let’s leave this to the experts with more insight information about existing background dynamics. What often seems true on the surface is different from the inside, with the knowledge reaching this inside.

Thank you!

 Paul 

–
Paul Alexander Wolf

–

https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2013/01/06/we-dream-of-things-that-never-were-and-say-why-not/

Related articles

• Guardian Weekly year in review 2013: Hope born in Iran but fades elsewhere in Middle East (theguardian.com)
• Writing the Wrongs: Obama Administration Iran Deal Cannot Work (writingtw.blogspot.com)
• Israel and Its U.S. Congress Demand Americans Pay and Die For A Third War – Against Iran (uprootedpalestinians.wordpress.com)
• It’s going to get bad fast between Israel and the US (timesofisrael.com)
• News Analysis: Rocket attack an attempt to drag Israel into Lebanon- Syria crisis – Xinhua (news.xinhuanet.com)
• Writing the Wrongs: Israeli Arab Hadash Party falsely denies PMW report documenting the party&?39;s Facebook posting of terrorist calling to kidnap Israelis (writingtw.blogspot.com)
• Doc’s Talk: The Year Obama Wasted (docstalk.blogspot.com)
• Mohamad Chatah fmr Lebanese minister, wrote a letter last week to Iranian Pres Rouhani; was killed by car bomb Friday http://t.co/JFR1KRAI7W (online.wsj.com)
• MEMORANDUM: USA Planned Syrian Civilian Catastrophe Since 2007 (Timeline exposed) (syrianfreepress.wordpress.com)
• U.S. had been planning Syrian Catastrophe since 2007 (inquiringminds.cc)

“Lass sie nach Berlin kommen” – Berlin 2012 takes a proactive lead!

Chancelor of the Federal Republic of Germany Dr. Angela Merkel on the open door day at the Bundeskanzleramt in Berlin, Germany Français : Dr Angela Merkel, chancelière de la République Fédérale d’Allemagne, lors de la journée portes ouvertes de la Bundeskanzleramt à Berlin, en Allemagne. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Angela Merkel

“Two thousand years ago the proudest boast was civis Romanus sum (“I am a Roman citizen“). Today, in the world of freedom, the proudest boast is “Ich bin ein Berliner!”… All free men, wherever they may live, are citizens of Berlin, and, therefore, as a free man, I take pride in the words “Ich bin ein Berliner!” – John F Kennedy

“Lass sie nach Berlin kommen”

On the 26th of June 1963 at the Berlin Wall, President John F Kennedy was emphasising the support of the United States in the above quoted way to West Germany, 22 months after a Soviet controlled  East Germany established the Berlin Wall as a barrier between East and West.
–
 The message was aimed both at the Soviets and the Berliners, and was an obvious statement of U.S. policy in the aftermath of the construction of the Berlin Wall.

–
Many years past and the world faced many changes and dangers!

–
 Now,  for almost half a century after this speech – after the agony from the past, after the agony of war – Germany may assist in keeping Europe together in the way it was intended to work in the positive.

 

Efforts this time not only in Europe as a whole, but in the United States as well, – apart from other countries.

From the streets of Amsterdam to the halls of power in Paris the eyes are in part again on Berlin.

Not this time Berlin being the victim or an aggressor, but Germany being a major financial power in Europe to lead this continent out of the biggest financial crisis since World War II.

European leaders are close to panic over a debt situation that could take down the entire global economy. An other recession in the US could even bring President Obama’s re-election in 2012 at risk.

The leaders of both France and Germany this week agreed on a new fiscal pact that  will assist and prevent another debt crisis.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy outlined the basic elements of the plan to increase an essential budget discipline, after meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel in Paris.

During the entire crisis, Angela Merkel has worked diligently and closely with the French President Nicolas Sarkozy and other nations which share the Euro. Sarkozy however, the other strong leader in Europe, is not performing as expected in the polls for the pending elections next year and proved in the weeks past to be willing and follow the German Chancellor’s perceptions and example on the European crisis.

Sarkozy is happy with the concept of German’s idea of countries ceasing control of significant part of their budgets to a central authority if so required, at the cost of some national sovereignty.

It is true that more stability is required with sanctions if EU countries allow or commit to spending not in their budget at a final cost for other countries.

Much of this crisis has been inflicted by irresponsible financial behaviour. Government leaders from the 17 euro zone nations should meet at least monthly to discuss ways to boost economic growth as the Euro needs to be saved including the European Union.

The last being required as otherwise the repercussions could be most dramatic with social unrest in various countries being the result.

“The crisis requires an extra commitment towards unity and a Europe that will not repeat the mistakes of the past,” – said Sarkozy, speaking with Merkel at a press conference.

The unity in the US was once an issue for different reasons but where unity in Europe can’t be maintained for other reasons it would open the door to potential chaos and possibly violence.

The Berlin-engineered action plan for tackling Europe’s crisis, including vigorous rules to keep national budgets under control is vital to be implemented and accepted at the next European Union summit, as it reflects a valuable strategy to keep both the Union and the Euro intact, – learning from reckless financial behaviour in the past for which citizens can’t be held responsible.

Governments have an obligation to meet the commitments to voters and looking both after welfare of State and citizens. The current situation requires as well an incentive on greater consumer spending, increasing taxes for the higher income groups and keeping interest rates low.

As the difference between rich and poor is increasing in some European states, those states are at risk of more social unrest as e.g. reflected in the UK not too long ago, – the last for issues not related with the current EU situation.

However if the EU and the Euro do collapse as a result of past political and financial failures, the social dynamics in various European countries will change for the worst.

Hence the courage of the German Chancellor Angela Merkel at this time of crisis in Europe being applauded for taking a leading role, with significant financial experts in Germany.

The EU leaders are having to debate revising EU treaties and other measures to strengthen both the economical and political integration in Europe and I am sure they will get there over the hurdles in the years to come, as the problem resolving ability from both France and in particular Germany in this attempt with the leadership being shown – reflects favourably on the qualities being available,  despite the crisis not being resolved as yet.

–
 It shows that in an interdependent world both recourses and leadership requirements are vital for sustaining major crisis, – and let’s be happy that Germany now is at the forefront of one of the most positive post-war endeavours, – which might turn out this time to be a blessing for both Europe, the US and possibly all financial markets.

 As can be seen dynamics do change with positive engagement, a lesson to be learnt and so valuable for international dynamics.

–
 This does not take away that times can be difficult and complex, but nobody could have crossed the Ocean if they would have been able to escape the ship in the storm.
–
 Escaping the ship by storm is still a risk in the years ahead, but the dangers in an international economy with potential new recession in the US round about 2013 is an issue where all parties being involved need to weather the storm and eliminate the internal risks to destabilise the boat.

 

Not doing this could have “Titanic proportions” for the Western hemisphere. Our problems are made by man and can be resolved by man, willing to take this vital task on board and willing to counteract the obstacles, – with a united will to weather the storm. Reason and spirit have done this in the past, – reason and spirit may do this in the future.
–

Thank you!

 Paul 

–
Paul Alexander Wolf

–

More results from wordpress.com »

–

https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2013/01/06/we-dream-of-things-that-never-were-and-say-why-not/

 

Related articles

• Germany’s Merkel urges patience on NSA answers (bigstory.ap.org)
• Hajo Funke| Offener Brief an die Bundeskanzlerin in Sache 5+1-Verhandlungen (hajofunke.wordpress.com)
• Can Obama’s Berlin Speech Match John F. Kennedy’s and Ronald Reagan’s? (usnews.com)
• Germany’s Schaeuble eyes new term as finance chief (bigstory.ap.org)
• Wednesday, June 26, 1963: JFK in West Berlin (the60sat50.blogspot.com)
• ‘Ich bin ein Berliner’: 50 years on from that JFK speech (georgesjournal.org)
• JFK, Berlin, 1963: The right time. The right place. The right message (theglobeandmail.com)
• “The impact of The Kissinger Peace Project that Crooks Stopped” (whitecolorcopiesonly.wordpress.com)
• Ich bin ein Berliner (Guest Voice) (themoderatevoice.com)
• Reagan’s GOP is Erecting its Own Caste System Berlin Wall (LiberalBeef.com)

 

Australia’s role in the Asia – Pacific Region

English: Paul Keating in 2007 – crop. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

“In  my  time  I  have  seen  truth  that  was  anything  under  the  sun  but  just,  and  I  have  seen  justice  using  tools  and  instruments  I  wouldn’t  want  to  touch  with  a  ten-foot  fence  rail”      – William  Faulkner  (Knight’s Gambit 1949)

Justice, balance of power and peace

 

Former Prime Minister Paul Keating said the other day that China must be welcomed into the world as a shared partner and a vital economic power, not a military or political challenge to be contained. He made a speech in November 2004 in Beijing in which he stated that he believed that China would become an economic competitor of the United States, but not a strategic competitor, and its military growth was unlikely to be about force projection.

Keating still thinks “the rise of China is one of the great events of all economic and human history and I think this will be overwhelmingly a positive thing for the region and the world”.

Whilst the White House and the Pentagon have different views, Australia seems now verbally part of the US containment policy as part of a well prepared Presidential visit to Australia.

 

The US perception is that the model from China based on communism and the ruling of a committee is doomed to fail and President Obama is speaking about this in the Australian Parliament. President Obama says: “With our new focus on this region …. We’re here to stay. … History’s on the side of the free. … By upholding core principles, we partner with democracies.”

The speech is basically saying that the United States is back and some would say we can’t help  thinking that the commentary was somehow about the old Soviet Union.

 

It should be clear that China is not the old Soviet Union and trying to contain China with new military alliances could well prove to be an error of judgement. This speech should have been held in Washington and not in the Australian Parliament.

 

Like the US needs space and being ready to defend it, China is entitled on space as well as long as the occupation of this space is not based on domination. China proves already in Africa to increase space and to make sure there is a supply of recourses for China, but all this is based on sound economic principles and a win win situation for countries being involved. As long it continues this way other countries have the benefit of China s as well, which is positive.

 

Containment of China unprovoked could lead to conflict. China need to be able to emerge, not as a dominating power but as a power contributing to both its own welfare and the welfare of other nations. Similar the US needs to play a role in the Asia-Pacific area, but based on the same principles and in concert with other powers, to watch and maintain stability and coöperation in this vital area.

 

The US position should not be based on inflated cold war sentiments being dominant some decades ago, within their stance against Communism in the former Soviet Union.

 

Let’s face it, apart from human rights issues which will be addressed in China for the better in the future, China never exposed real threat in foreign policy and their issues with the Chinese Sea are not much different from what the US feel as their entitlements close to their borders. Like the US, China is not free from injustice but on foreign policy “let’s not sweat the small stuff” as was once reflected in an interesting booklet, and let us “seek to understand first”.

 

The world and the US are justified concerned about the movements from both Iran and North Korea and allowing those countries getting away with nuclear military expansion would be the same mistake as was allowing Germany to rearm itself after the 1st world war. In a broader sense the US itself after the second world war has been involved in various conflicts until recently where the legitimate question could be raised why matters were not dealt with differently as those conflicts did cost millions of lives, – all for some part due to CIA and Pentagon driven policy. The freedom in the US goes that far that when a US President is not alignment with Pentagon and/or CIA policy he may be assassinated like happened with President John F Kennedy in November 1963. The result was a dramatic escalation of US military involvement in Vietnam at a cost of millions of lives and like Australia followed US footsteps in both Iraq and Afghanistan, it followed US footsteps in Vietnam without ever realising that those choices in essence were ill contemplated, based on dependence and not interdependence.

 

The Pentagon at the time of former President G.W.Bush has been working on a new China war plan with the most advanced weapons being ready for use in case of conflict. The US announced only this week the creation of “the Air Sea Battle Office”, which is precisely designed how to work out how to counteract China’s growing missile dominance, its dominance in the region with fighter aircraft, new versions of fighter aircraft and warships.

Some realism is right. Whilst not being in favour for any arms race, any country is running a defence policy. The US is doing the same. What we see evolving requires the need to prevent domination of any country, the Pentagon policies included. Hence we need a region accommodating China without building a military structure around it. The US would not like it when other countries would do this at the disadvantage of the US. China likewise does not like this at the disadvantage of China. Australia again without much realistic consideration is again following the footsteps of the US-based on dependence. “Australia’s dependence on a major power lies deep in our national psyche” said Malcolm Fraser once.

Within context countries like Iran and North Korea impose a far greater danger than China and trying to contain China will only improve the chance on conflict among superpowers on those potential dangerous nations,- which is simply stupidity in the worst possible way. China has enormous leverage on those countries and seeking support and coöperation from China as an ally and not a country requiring to be contained in the dogmatic views of the Pentagon, would make the world a safer place.

If we look at history we may hope that any US President is fully in charge of the Pentagon and it’s generals and President Obama’s message in the Australian Parliament is considerably coated with Pentagon policy, brilliantly delivered however but to be watched carefully on the implications for the region. Australia did swallow the rhetoric against China without taking the long-term view.The point is that there is already the 7th US fleet in the Pacific with bases in Okinawa and Guam, but the new message is that the US is getting out of Iraq and Afghanistan and that they are coming here. There are many Republicans in the US talking about “knocking China over” and whilst President Obama is far more moderate he represents a country showing extreme dynamics. US Congress is a reflection of at times dysfunctional Republican behaviour and taking the long view I don’t think Australia should be dragged into policies of the Pentagon which were not always that fruitful in the past. On foreign policy matters we can’t complain about China till so far where as US foreign policy could have been dealt with clearly differently on various occasions. There was once a Pacific war and we don’t need a new one! China is Australia’s biggest trading partner and China reflects an emerging power with no evidence of desiring to dominate the world as they know history. They represent a country where despite human rights issues some one and a half billion of people have been dragged out of poverty and by no means should this country be compared with the former USSR. Obviously nothing is fool-proof in history but this applies to the US as well and whilst Australia is an important ally of the US, good intentions in this area are always subject to proof and if Obama’s rhetoric will be followed by strongly driven Pentagon policies in the Asian Pacific region we may need to be perhaps on our guard of the US as well because an increase of US military activity in history was not rarely followed by US inflicted war down the line, – at times.

Pentagon and CIA policies are stronger than US Presidents at times, even in the US as a democracy. Whilst President Johnson could not coop anymore with his own inflicted escalation of the Vietnam war, he resigned in 1968. The most succesful Presidential candidate opposing the Vietnam war (Robert Kennedy) was assassinated by the military wing of the Pentagon (the CIA)  and this provided a more Pentagon friendly candidate, Richard Nixon, the chance to be elected US President and continue Pentagon driven policy.

The reflections of Australian foreign minister Kevin Rudd on the recent 7.30 News report were more of a hardline response to China and for a person with such a claimed insight knowledge of China this was not a demonstration of wise and insightful diplomacy as Australia as a middle power did change position after Obama’s visit, as it would seem.

 

As a middle power Australia should be more independent in it’s role in the Pacific as the “core values” of the US did not always seem what it could and should have been, and foreign policy of China till so far did show greater stability than what the US did if we count the wars over the last decades and the millions of deaths in military conflict. Democracy can be the core value but history did prove that democracy was neither perfect nor always carried by people who had high standards of integrity and a broader view.

 

Kevin Rudd said: “We’re not going to have any national security policy dictated by any other external power.” However the exemption seems the US and the Pentagon. Kevin Rudd represents Australian policy when he later says: “That’s a sovereign matter for Australia. We don’t seek to dictate what the Chinese about their national security policy.”

–

Australia would be wise not to allow their own national security to be dictated by either the US or China. The difference is that China till so far made no efforts to instruct Australia on issues of national security but the US did.

For the region applies that Australia as a middle power needs to play in concert with other powers and not co creating an alliance to contain a super power like China, which neither provoked Australia in any way nor provoked any other country in any significant way.

This means that it is in Australia’s interest to have both productive and friendly relations with the US and China, providing leverage and an example in better communication when those 2 super powers may get carried away with different opinions.

Whilst safe with President Obama, the US under some Republican Presidents was not always the country defending the core values of both Democracy and human rights. It would seem that there are too many ideas what the core values of a democracy should be. The majority vote at a particular time in history is not always the right choice and does not always show the right action as being clearly demonstrated in US Congress.

The development of Australia as a great middle power continuing to play the role being required, as happened in the 1980s and ’90s did include foreign policy like APEC and it’s leaders’ meeting, the ASEAN regional forum, the Chemical Weapons Convention, the Canberra Commission for the Elimination of Nuclear Weapons, the Cairns Group etc. This should not be thrown away by a Pentagon dominated foreign policy in Australia.

Neither that we have foresight in how power will evolve in the United States Government in the years lying ahead, nor do we have foresight how power will evolve in China, but as a great middle power Australia has an obligation to maintain a pleasant and peaceful co-existence with surrounding states and a close military alliance with the US to contain China whilst not being provoked as a nation will not pay any dividend to Australia and is compromising the role Australia could play as a middle power, and as such the foreign policy of Australia at present (if not revised) could prove to be a floored one by principle and on principle with little insight in historical dynamics.

The policy of containment of China at this stage in history is wrong and without proper base, guided actually by US rhetoric and Australia should have known better. Former US Vice President Al Gore did describe in his book “The Assault On Reason” the US dynamics when George W Bush ordered forces to invade Iraq, the damage being done to the US as a democracy as Bush played the public with a fear of terrorism campaign whilst the US Senate stand mute then, like it stayed mute on various other occasions including political assassinations.

Australia should not allow “assault on reason” within the Asia-Pacific area and whilst the dynamics in Australian Parliament may show at times doubt on reason both in terms of style and quality, as a country we need to be stronger than this.

The answer to this problem is that what could have been done differently yesterday can be corrected tomorrow and only fools don’t change their mind in the course of history. New beginnings depend on endings and to make them in the right way the right time and for the right reason!

Thank you!

 Paul 

–
Paul Alexander Wolf

–

https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2013/01/06/we-dream-of-things-that-never-were-and-say-why-not/

Related articles

• Australia’s integration into US war plans against China (wsws.org)
• Obama’s “Pivot to Asia”: Australia Central to American War Plans Against China (rinf.com)
• US Rebalancing To Asia-Pacific: Implications For West Asia – Analysis (eurasiareview.com)
• Deal to Move Okinawa Base Wins Approval (nytimes.com)
• Australia’s Integration Into US War Plans Against China (libya360.wordpress.com)
• Savills appoints new Head of Hotels for Asia Pacific (savills.co.uk)
• Too Close for Comfort? The U.S. Pacific Presence (wallstreetpit.com)
• Deal to Move Okinawa Base Wins Approval – New York Times (nytimes.com)
• Vice President Biden Comes to China (chinaglobalimpact.com)
• Power plays How long will China tolerate US’s military role in Asia? (thenewstribune.com)

The Art of Leadership and Lessons from the Past – Edward M. Kennedy

Edward Moore Kennedy (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Leadership lessons  (Edward M. Kennedy)

 

“Ted Kennedy’s life is a reminder that much can be achieved by late bloomers; that you don’t have to have your career all figured out by the time you’re   

   25, 35, or even over 45.”

             – Sarah Green in a post on Harvard Business Publishing.

–

His life was marked by tragedy and somehow recklessness perhaps in his early years, but change within himself  later in life  made him become one of the greatest Senators in US history. He went through personal lessons of resilience and agonising redemption, realising that he had to face his own shortcomings., – which he did.

We have to make sometimes very personal choices in life and whatever triggered his change,  he started to reshape his life in his late 50’s making him from the age of 59 until his death a most fascinating leader – showing that leadership starts with self-control and responsible decisions. However not only this.  If we are fortunate enough in life to find someone who loves us for what we are,  we may be able to multiply affection and love by giving of what we once received.

Good leaders are just human beings as well, the last at times forgotten by the public and media.

The assassination of his 2 older brothers contributed to his first years of struggle and (hidden) heartbreak, – “Teddy” now representing his  “legendary” family following events in 1968.  However he really found a new voice whilst standing up for those not too well off in American society, showing to be a key figure amidst liberal principles.

Edward Moore Kennedy (February 22, 1932 – August 25, 2009) was the Democratic US  Senator for Massachusetts, serving almost 47 years. He was the second most senior US Senator when he died and the third or fourth longest-serving member of this college, being perhaps one of the most positive and powerful legislator’s in American history.

 

He was the last surviving son of Joseph Patrick Kennedy, Sr; the youngest brother of President John F. Kennedy and Senator Robert F. Kennedy (both assassinated in public service)  and Joseph P. Kennedy, Jr., the last being killed in action in World War II; and the father of Congressman Patrick J. Kennedy. After the assassination of his brother John an Robert he was for many years the most important living member of  the Kennedy family.

Kennedy’s New York Times obituary described him: “He was a Rabelaisian figure in the Senate and in life, instantly recognizable by his shock of white hair, his florid, oversize face, his booming Boston brogue, his powerful but pained stride. He was a celebrity, sometimes a self-parody, a hearty friend, an implacable foe, a man of large faith and large flaws, a melancholy character who persevered, drank deeply and sang loudly. He was a Kennedy.”

Following his failed presidential bid, Kennedy became one of the most influential members of the Democratic Party, and was later in the 1990’s called a “Democratic icon”as well as “The Lion of the Senate“.  Kennedy and his Senate staff wrote more than 2000 bills and more than 300 were enacted into law. Kennedy supported another 550 bills  becoming  law after 1973. Kennedy was most effective in dealing with Republican senators and administrations, sometimes even at the irritation of some Democrats. During the G.W. Bush administration, almost every bipartisan bill being signed had significant involvement from Kennedy. A late 2000s survey of Republican senators ranked Kennedy first among Democrats in bipartisanship, which should be an example for the Republicans (in 2011). Kennedy was committed to  the principle “never let the perfect be the enemy of the good,” and would agree to pass legislation he viewed as incomplete or imperfect with the goal of improving it down the road. Somehow different we see this with President Barack Obama as well. As long as it works for the better progress, often a good compromise is required. In April 2006, Kennedy was selected by Time as one of “America’s 10 Best Senators”; the magazine discussed that he had “amassed a titanic record of legislation affecting the lives of almost every man, woman and child in the country” and that “by the late 1990s, the liberal icon had become such a prodigious cross-aisle dealer that Republican leaders began pressuring party colleagues not to sponsor bills with him”.Even the Republican presidential nominee John McCain said in May 2008: …”[Kennedy] is a legendary lawmaker and I have the highest respect for him. When we have worked together, he has been a skillful, fair and generous partner.” At the time of Kennedy’s death, sociologist and Nation board member Norman Birnbaum wrote that Kennedy had come to be viewed as the “voice” and “conscience” of progressive America ( American progressivism). He worked on major issues of our time including civil rights, healthcare, the war in Vietnam, Watergate, and the quest for peace in Northern Ireland.

Kennedy’s passion was at times most powerful and contagious.  Besides this he was able to disagree on issues without making it personal. He was therefore greatly admired across the political spectrum.

What can we learn from him in terms of leadership, – without subdividing the issues too much?

1. “Stick- to – itiveness” and give it the very best performance.

Whilst his performance at the start of his political career was a learning curve and subject for improvement he won his Senate seat for the first time during the Presidency of his brother, Jack Kennedy. He was perhaps in a fortunate position but for certain was he not “a celebrity Senator”.  He proved this after each re-election, especially when he began performing for his constituents and collaborating with his colleagues.

He had an unwavering tenacity and perseverance which did include in a steady pace mastering the details, studying and learning amidst changing issues.Kennedy rolled up his sleeves and earned his place, even through rough and threatening times. He continued planning , timing and cultivating a degree of patience. The reward for his “stick-to-itiveness” was that he knew he stayed the course by following “True Compass”

When Mitt Romney challenged Kennedy for his Senate seat in 1994, the crucial moment of their debate — which probably made  Kennedy win the re-election — involved Kennedy pressing Romney for the specifics on his health care plan, with Romney forced to  admit that he hadn’t worked out all the details. “Well that’s what you have to do with legislation,” the Senator replied. Kennedy knew the job. His career rewards followed from his service and perseverance to master the details to be required for progressive change.

Ted Kennedy faced various public crises which could have destroyed him, yet he proved to be resilient and able to learn.  He restored confidence in his leadership. The still-mysterious incident at Chappaquiddick where a young woman drowned nearly ended his career. Whilst showing at that particular time no courage and ducking accountability he bounced back by redoubling his efforts to do his job well. Even fumbling during an important interview during his bid for the Democratic Presidential nomination in 1980, he recovered by applying more energy and passion to his work in the Senate.  He was not perfect but he learned from his mistakes and became a better human being, persistent and committed as he was.  Besides this he never claimed victory for himself but was generously able to share credit

2.Find a purpose recognised by yourself as a very strong one.

Kennedy reached a stage of mind  to feel that his live belonged to the community and his newly found values did suspend part of his ego. He rejoiced in burning up for the values he stood for before handing the responsibility for his course to the next generation. Ted Kennedy believed in public service as the best profession and in government to help all citizens getting their chance for a better quality of life. Once he found his voice and his core mission after overcoming some misery from the past his position and “Compass” were clear and often he spoke for the people who could not speak for themselves.  The goals were so important that he was willing to work with political opponents in the Senate to reach agreement on measures that served the people.He supported President Bush’s “No Child Left Behind legislation” for school reform.  The cause of children less privileged was that important to him that he rather would compromise and get a bit done whilst the alternative was no action at all. He took action by calling on higher principles which did resonate with principle centred members of the other party. He proved that his ability to compromise for a better outcome was a strength rather a weakness, the last based on ongoing efforts to build strong relations across the political spectrum. With at times an emotional appeal for what he thought to be right he was able to get the more intellectual minded on board from the other party. His emotional bank account on the Senate floor had a large surplus, he was well liked and well trusted on his views.

–
3.Never forget family & friends.

The hard-working Ted Kennedy was at heart a family man. After the assassination of his brothers he was the stronghold and the father for many amidst the larger Kennedy family, keeping people together, encouraging close to lost children, playing touch-football at the family compound in Hyannis Port and arranging  family outings to historic sites,-  apart from sailing away from the pier in Hyannis Port through the waters of Nantucket at the Cape. In spirit his late brother President John F Kennedy and Robert F Kennedy were always close to him and the love for his extended family guided him through tough times in his life. He was a role model for some of the Kennedy children and helped them with their own belief system and the power of the words: “I can” and “I will”.

He did neither always agree with family nor friends but he was able to agree to disagree without losing his affection or staying amicable. Whilst being able to continue to be friendly and loving he was able to work together with a range of people, based on trust. He understood the power of being considerate  and friendly.

In summary:

Did Ted Kennedy add value to life? Yes he did! He stood for the people who had no voice, trying through legislation to improve the living conditions of fellow citizens for many in his country. He made no major paradigm shift as eg Gandhi did with the perception of “non violence ” (under all circumstances). However Teddy Kennedy tried to mobilise the available recourses in the US Senate to help change at various levels. He stood by his principles but was prepared to listen and seek compromise for the better. He was a trustworthy icon in the US Senate working with an excellent team supporting him to work the required changes for the better. He was not free of mistakes and made a few but made good on them by getting a better person and sticking to his compass, which always directed him back to the original course of action. He had a mission, imagination and was both persistent and committed to give it the best performance, – at some stage not for his ego anymore but for the benefit of others. He did own up to his mistakes and learnt from them with a faith to allow eventually the higher power in himself taking over.

With his belief system Involving the will of giving and with his own trials and errors in life, he showed us: “Together we can, together we will!”

And that’s enough, –  good enough!

Thank you!

–

 Paul 

–
Paul Alexander Wolf

–

https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2013/01/06/we-dream-of-things-that-never-were-and-say-why-not/

 

Related articles

• “Senator Edward M. Kennedy’s office issued a paper stating that the literacy rate in Massachusetts…” (basedheisenberg.tumblr.com)
• US Envoy Caroline Kennedy Visits Nagasaki (abcnews.go.com)
• JFK’s Echoes Still Heard In U.S. Senate (huffingtonpost.com)
• John F. Kennedy and the National Library of Medicine (circulatingnow.nlm.nih.gov)
• US remembers Kennedy 50 years on (bbc.co.uk)
• Obama awards Medal of Freedom to Clinton, Oprah, others (usatoday.com)
• Remembering JFK (droninglawyer.com)
• Rose Elizabeth Kennedy (pyrokin.wordpress.com)
• New Kennedys: 4 Members of Clan Who Could Carry Political Torch (abcnews.go.com)
• Obama, Clinton unite at JFK’s grave – Ninemsn (news.ninemsn.com.au)

Profiles in US Presidential Violations of Justice (Part 11 – Epilogue & Summary)

   –

–

–                                                                                                                          

If this is the first article you read in this series about “Profiles in US Presidential Violations of Justice”, you might be interested to read first about the 8 Presidents being discussed in the 10 earlier chapters . Start in this case at Part 1 or 2 and work your way up to Chapter 10. Perhaps one at the time. Those chapters  can be found in “Recent Posts” at the right upper area of this page in the July/August 2011 editions. Other articles can be found in different monthly sections….Whilst not everybody agrees, – it is my opinion that with the arrival of President Obama in 2009, a new chapter started with various and valuable dimensions, leaving for the US a dark past behind since the assassination of President John F Kennedy in 1963.

–

–

The US is a country with wide spectrum divisions and dangers but still now more civilised than in the way certain things have been dealt with in the past at the level of the Executive Branch. Let’s hope it stay this way in the years ahead

–

–

>Epilogue<

 

 “I look forward to an America which commands respect throughout the world, not only for its strength, but for its civilization as well. And I look forward to a world which will be safe not only for democracy and diversity but also for personal distinction.”

–

 

 –

–

“With all the history of war, and the human race’s history unfortunately has been a good deal more war than peace, with nuclear weapons distributed all through the world, and available, and the strong reluctance of any people to accept defeat, I see the possibility in the 1970’s of the President of the United States having to face a world in which 15 or 20 or 25 nations may have these weapons.”

–

–

“My fellow Americans, let us take that first step. Let us…step back from the shadow of war and seek out the way of peace. And if that journey is a thousand miles, or even more, let history record that we, in this land, at this time, took the first step.”    

–

–                                                

“The United States, as the world knows, will never start a war. We do not want a war. We do not now expect a war. This generation of Americans has already had enough — more than enough — of war and hate and oppression. We shall be prepared if others wish it. We shall be alert to try to stop it. But we shall also do our part to build a world of peace where the weak are safe and the strong are just. We are not helpless before that task or hopeless of its success.”   – John F Kennedy, the 35th US President.

–

 –>>

–

The beauty of a democracy is that systems of government are far more flexible than an autocracy, provided that voters use their right to vote with wisdom and commitment to select the people who are able to represent them with the required integrity and courage to work those systems for the better welfare of the people they represent. “Profiles in US Presidential violations of Justice” has neither been an example of excellence in US Government systems in the domain of the Executive branch, nor has it been able to give the worst examples at the background of the past operating powers in the process of their actions.   The justice violations as part of Presidential powers or extended powers at the Executive branch of the US have been quite clear at certain areas and the US  both as a Republic and a Democracy has been quite damaged since the assassination on the 35th US President John Fitzgerald Kennedy. It is fair to say that there has been an increasing level of disconnection between citizens and their government, in part at least as due to the lack of transparency, the various cover up’s, the number of illegal and criminal covert operations, the massive increase and difficult to control intelligence units. Apart from the contribution to unrest in the world and sacrificing people on pointless battlefields.

–

-[

Whilst most people working in US Agencies including those of the Military and the CIA are most valuable and do a good job in the interest of their country, the dangers of the Pentagon and the CIA being overpowering and misleading the US President to help long-term US military strategy, including the future US direction, are the most prominent dangers of the US as a democracy. As earlier reflected, a general will do most of the times an excellent job at war, the preparation, the logistics etc. Once they are ordered to go to war they will do it right and the army will do it right and if such a war has a real purpose as the last possible option after all other options did not work, there are occasions this could be a justified war. The first direction however should be always to prevent either war or terror. The military presence in US policy making and/or direction has always been more than much. Some earlier US Presidents did warn for the potential dangers in retrospect.

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

 

After the JFK  assassination most US Presidents were at some level marionettes of those major background powers and with President Obama it is still wait and see how matters will evolve as he needs to balance with extreme caution amidst various dynamics.

Regarding the latest full Presidency of G.W. Bush and the 9/11 Commission it is worth to make the added notations:

The “Sept. 11 Commission”  did investigate  a claim that U.S. defense intelligence officials identified ringleader Mohamed Atta and three other hijackers as a likely part of an al Qaeda cell more than a year before the 2001 hijackings but did not send the information to law enforcement. Republican Curt Weldon, vice chairman of the House Armed Services and Homeland Security committees, said that the men were identified in 1999 by a classified military intelligence unit known as “Able Danger.” An earlier link to al Qaeda than any previously disclosed intelligence about Atta is correct. “The 9/11 commission did not learn of any U.S. government knowledge prior to 9/11 of surveillance of Mohamed Atta or of his cell,”  co-Chairman of the “September 11 Commission”  Lee H. Hamilton said.  This is correct as well.

Many of the 9/11 family reactions on this late information is not surprising as it would seem some significant issues have not been properly investigated.  The question is about why  didn’t “Able Danger” report their finding to the FBI?  Why wasn’t Atta and other 9/11 terrorists put on a watch list even though there was evidence of their terrorist ties?  Have there been profound failures or were there other reasons which needed to be concealed at all cost?

The truth is that “Able Danger” was banned from sharing information with the FBI. One of the members of  the “9/11 Commission” herself was  deeply involved  in some Clinton scandals, including “Chinagate”. Jamie Gorelick was Janet Reno’s right hand “man” in the Justice Department.

The answer to the question about why this new information came that late, being banned from the Commission, is because Jamie Gorelick was on the Commission for the purpose to hide information, as such to protect the position of former President Clinton, – as it would seem. There have been never proper investigations in the the intelligence failures of the Clinton era. John Deutch, former Director of Central Intelligence, had signed a criminal plea agreement in connection with his mishandling of national secrets the day before being pardoned by the outgoing President Clinton.

During Clinton’s Presidency  in 1997 the Taliban was  invited in Texas to meet with former US President G.H.W. Bush.. They had their meeting.

Current President Karzai of Afghanistan worked for former US President G.H.Bush (Bush,sr) quite some time ago and there have been close longstanding Taliban connections  between former President Bush and the CIA at the time. The CIA supported the Taliban in their fight against the Soviets many years ago, as we did see in the earlier chapters. Within this context Osama bin Laden did visit the US for support and weapons to be distributed to the Taliban. It was within this context that there has been meetings between Taliban representatives and G.H Bush in Texas, at the invitation of the former US President. Whilst the CIA used Massoud (a famous Mujahideen leader)  for a while to help the US force, – during the meeting however between Bush and the Taliban arrangements were made to assassinate Massoud. Other issues, including money oil and drugs profits, were discussed as well. In the  Taliban’s rise to power there was very much fighting and complex dynamics. Ahmad Shah Massoud  tried to start a nationwide political process with the goal of national consolidation and democratic elections, also inviting the Taliban to join the process and to contribute to stability. The last really so much required in Afghanistan.  Ahmad Shah Massoud had defeated the Soviet Red Army nine times in his home region of Panjshir, in north-eastern Afghanistan. He was highly regarded. However the Taliban declined to join such a political process. Osama bin Laden and Massoud were in essence enemies of each other. In the case of the Massoud assassination Karzai did act for Bush, and ordered as requested by Bush the assassination of Massoud. Two day before 9/11 he was killed.  Massoud had his own intelligence network and knew too much of what was going to happen. Massoud was aware of the Bush Karzai connections and the Taliban visit to  Texas and him blowing the whistle about 9/11 was obviously not allowed. He warned before 9/11 about pending terror attacks.

There have been various occasions that the US could have disposed Osama bin Laden but always at the last-minute there was a stand down. Osama bin Laden had to help first a secret and well prepared mission supported by the US Government, despite the existing tensions. He was a culprit used for a mission to help US foreign policy and to help the US to prepare for war with enough public support.  Bin Laden did not know that al-Qaeda would have “free access” to the US at the time of 9/11, and that the damage would be of such extended level.

Recordings from Rumsfeld before 9/11 did show that the only way America would be able to retaliate was a terrorist attack. A terrorist attack would give an excuse to attack both Afghanistan and Iraq. Nothing else would support such an agenda in the eyes of the world and the US. A terrorist attack would be the justification for plans being in place already. The CIA was well prepared to add to the damage on that fateful day in New York. On the night Bush gave his “Axis of Evil” designation to Afghanistan US forces were less than four hours from acquiring Osama Bin Laden. As requested by G.W.Bush Bill Richardson  intervened and the US missed deliberately a chance to get bin-Laden.

The time was not ready to dispose Osama bin Laden. Richardson was earlier the designated man to negotiate with the Taliban as part  of secret US policies in 1996 of a failed UNOCAL deal (Unocal Corporation) about the proposed building of an oil pipeline through the country. It failed, hence the US wanted to retaliate against the Taliban down the track. The Taliban and al-Qaeda (bin-Laden) were not always that friendly with each other. There have been various discussion to dispose bin-Laden but the US wanted to wait and allow Osama bin-Laden to execute his plan to attack the US. Massoud was aware of some part of the 9/11 plan, hence Karzai and his Taliban carried out the assassination for G.W. Bush  2 days before 9/11. Massoud would have blown the whistle in retrospect.

The Massoud assassination was however the biggest mistake ever made in terms of the US Afghanistan policy. The course of the Afghan unrest could have ended in favor of Massoud as he was both highly regarded and had most of the support for a different more fruitful direction in this troubled country, but it didn’t happen.  Massoud had intelligence information on 9/11 and 9/11 was supposed to go ahead as the G.W.Bush Administrattion with Cheney and Rumsfeld had prepared for it because (as mentioned) a trigger was required to start a war in Afghanistan against al-Qaeda and the Taliban, apart from the fact that it would give an excuse to attack Iraq as well if evidence of “weapons of mass destruction” being around could be created.  We know that there were no weapons of “mass destruction” in Iraq, but for attacking Iraq and disposing Saddam Hussein such required evidence could be fabricated in such a way that allies to join this mission would believe in a legitimate war against Iraq, and so it happened….

Massoud – in Afghanistan – had enough influence in retrospect to solve the problem in Afghanistan, to stop eventually the violence in a natural way. He had actually more influence than Osama bin-Laden and was of an entirely different nature.  He would have solved the problems eventually without any need for the US to intervene. However the US had mixed agenda’s and different interests.

Both Clinton and G.W.Bush had secrets to keep for the 9/11 Commission. Bush wanted to have an excuse to go to war in Afghanistan and provided deliberately Bin-Laden and al-Qaeda the opportunity for the 9/11 attacks with a stand down in security systems (different but similar with the JFK assassination, however this time with Rumsfeld & Cheney support), meanwhile organising before the attack the CIA (?) to plant bombs underneath the WTC buildings facilitating a controlled demolition.  WTC7 was involved as well  as there was a lot of Intelligence information re 9/11 (on purpose stored there). This would be all destroyed when WTC 7 would come down. WTC7 did however not endure the impact of a plane. The Pentagon attack was inflicted by missiles and not by the impact of a plane, despite the Government report. The last was an attack not inflicted by al-Qaeda, neither were the explosives bringing down the WTC buildings related with al-Qaeda. Those additions were ordered by the Executive branch of the US Government.

There was no wisdom at all in US policy at the time of the G.W. Bush Administration. Subject to further Senate and court hearings, the actions of former US President G.W.Bush were both criminal within and outside the US. Traveling to Switzerland he would have to stand trial as part of human right abuses as part of Swiss legislation in line with the Convention from Geneva. In the US he is a free man, protected by legislation, – the wrong legislation in his case.

Former US President G.W.Bush was responsible for both the preventable 9/11 implications and 2 most expensive wars for which the US is still paying the price. If Massoud would have had US protection and support at the time  the problems in Afghanistan would have been resolved without any intervention and President Obama would not have faced the problems as they are now.  The 9/11 drama was a calculated and criminal decision in the White House to mislead both the US and the world at the time to facilitate a reason to go to a war being acceptable to the world. However it came at a cost for those living in New York, it came at a cost for all people being involved in the war’s which followed and it came at a cost of human rights, the last being violated at all dimensions. The Kennedy assassination in 1963 was the start of a trend to be continued in various Administrations,  – covert operations being continued, – but 9/11 was the worst.

We know Bin Laden was determined to strike in the US as was the President’s Daily Brief prepared by the Central Intelligence Agency and given to President George W. Bush on the 6th of August, 2001. The brief warned of terrorism threats from Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda  36 days before the September 11, 2001 attacks.  CBS Evening News reported on this leaked memo document on the 15th of May 2002. The President’s Daily Brief (PDB) has important classified information on national security. The last collected by various U.S. intelligence agencies and given to the president and a select group of senior officials.  The PDB was reported in the 9/11 Commission Report on the 22nd of July 2004. The Phoenix Memo from the 10th of July 2001 reflects on FBI awareness. The recommendations were ignored and the person ignoring those recommendations was promoted after the 9/11 attacks by G.W.Bush.  Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice  are only a few groups as part of “the 9/11 Truth movement”, rejecting the outcome of the government facilitated “9/11 Commission Report”. As mentioned in the chapter about former US President G.W. Bush, – previous US President Carter did indicate the need for new investigations as well. It never happened.

Like the Government did stick in 1964 to the outcome of the Warren Commission report for many years, US Administrations will stick to the 9/11 Commission conclusions and do not and will not contest the outcome of this Commission due to the darker secrets being the foundation of ill selected wars in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Not only this, there was a hidden crime against US citizens in New York, allowed to be happening by the US Government at the time,  as mentioned to facilitate a reason to go to war.

It is this element of decision making in the White House which is so dangerous, –  if allowed to happen in the US without implications for those being responsible. I will come back on this. The US has a very poor record in the criminal justice systems when it applies to the US establishment.

–

–

For the purpose of this epilogue let’s just summarise the US Presidents from Lyndon Johnson until G.Bush, based on the information in the past chapters:

The 36th US President Lyndon Baines Johnson.

–

–

After the JFK assassination on the 22nd of November 1963 in Dallas (Texas)  Johnson (LBJ) became the new US President. The June edition of this web blog on the JFK assassination provides more detail. Whilst Kennedy declared to withdraw from Vietnam, after the JFK  assassination Johnson increased the forces in Vietnam almost immediately and with the Civil Rights Act being pushed through Congress he did win the 1965 elections easily. He ordered in 1965 the Airmobile Division and various CIA forces to go to Vietnam to enhance the fighting strength in this region, followed by an increased military fighting strength from 75000 to 125000 man. As often happens in history there needs to be a trigger to get public opinion on board when it applies to extending or starting war. We did see this on various occasions, 9/11 included. LBJ used a surprise Vietcong attack at Pleiku in which 6 American military advisers were killed and 116 wounded on the 6th of February 1965.  LBJ’s aides assisted him with a 2 stage and premeditated contingencies plan , prepared several months before the attack. The first step was a retaliation airstrike in North Vietnam and the second step was to intensify the air war as implemented in 1965. It proved that LBJ decided on this level of intervention without really considering the costs and implications. This happened later as well when G.W Bush decided to go to 2 different wars. LBJ was pushed by both the CIA and the Pentagon not to change direction and as both the CIA and Pentagon were the background powers playing a part in the JFK’s assassination with full LBJ’s approval  beforehand, he had likely not much choice to continue the way it was to get an US military victory. This was the military aim. Lyndon Johnson was a most compromised and controversial man. By the end of August 1966 only 47% in the US did approve Johnson’s Presidency. The war became increasingly unpopular. By 1968 more than 500000 US military troops were concentrated in Vietnam. The war was costing some 2 billion dollars a month and meanwhile more bombs were dropped in Vietnam than during the second world war. LBJ did fully support the JFK assassination cover up with  the installation of the Warren Commission and “highly favourable” CIA representatives running the historical show this Commission provided to mislead the US people and Congress. Whilst LBJ deciding not to be reelected anymore in 1968 this did not mean that the CIA and Pentagon’s directions about Vietnam had changed. LBJ did serve a purpose, as other US Presidents served a military purpose. Issues around the JFK assassination as a matter of “national security”were still neither to be disclosed  nor the direction of Vietnam after 1968 to be  discontinued.  LBJ not being a Presidential candidate anymore in 1968 opened the way for new background dynamics.

Both the CIA, the FBI with Hoover and  the Pentagon were profoundly against a potential Robert Francis Kennedy being US President in 1968.  RFK would have been neither an US President being compromised by the military establishment nor by the CIA or Hoover. With RFK  winning the California primaries in June 1968 he became the person who would likely defeat Nixon in 1968. Nixon was aware of this, like FBI Chief Hoover. Nixon was from CIA perspective “100% save for US military policy” and the anti-war movement needed to be broken. First by taking Martin Luther King,jr out of the picture and when Robert Kennedy increased in popularity and became the likely candidate to win the elections after the primaries in California,  the premeditated strategy was to assassinate Kennedy as he was considered to be at this stage the main obstacle for the CIA’s defined “national security”, – like his brother ( the former US President) was in 1963. The implications would be horrendous if  Kennedy would be elected President in 1968.  He was perhaps even more determined than his brother “Jack”.  Both the FBI (with Hoover still being the Chief) and the CIA could not face this prospect as with RFK being President the withdrawal from Vietnam would become a fact. Hoover would likely lose his job with everything he inflicted at the background of the various scenes in which he played a role.  However, last but not least the JFK assassination with a floored Warren Commission report would be vigorously investigated and CIA involvement with Lyndon Johnson’s part would be disclosed to the public. As such Kennedy would likely get both Congressional and public support to reorganise the CIA and  bring LBJ to justice, – besides Nixon. Nixon was involved as well in the JFK assassination and in particular ordering Jack Ruby to kill Oswald. No, Nixon was not happy either with facing a second Kennedy in a Presidential contest as with RFK potentially winning he could forget his political future as well.

RFK became a security risk. As a US Senator of New York he was of no harm but being the potential next US President in 1968 after Johnson would open all the past corruptions from the LBJ US Government, including  various other people being involved in the assassination of his brother (the 35th US President) and “Bobby” for certain would not take any nonsense.  He did not make it.  The cover up was smart and well swallowed by the American public. Americans tend to swallow easily what the Government tells them and the media control has helped a fair bit. The question is who gave the order to take him as a second Kennedy out of the picture. Days before the JFK assassination Robert Kennedy was in the process of leaking most damaging information to Life Magazine about the Bobby Baker scandal in which Johnson was clearly involved, with an earlier political assassination in which LBJ was reportedly involved. LBJ did order that particular assassination. If this would leak with the other corruption issues, it would blow his political career for once and for all. However the 22nd of November 1963 did change history for once and for all. FBI Chief Hoover assisted LBJ to prevent the Bobby Baker scandal leaking to the press after LBJ’s inauguration. Hoover was always so helpful.

Both the combination of LBJ being unpopular, the riots in Chicago and the discouragement of both African – Americans and liberals after the assassinations of both MLK and RFK contributed to the fact that former Vice President Nixon (under Eisenhower) did win the Presidential elections  from Hubert Humphrey (LBJ’s Vice President). Robert Kennedy’s assassination did  not only play Nixon  in his favour, but it played his close ally Hoover and the CIA/military establishment in their favour as well.  LBJ likewise did not need to worry about RFK anymore. The secrets regarding the 22nd of November 1963 in Dallas would be even more secured with Richard Nixon than with Hubert Humphrey. The background powers in the US proved to be succesful in their strategic approach with impact on public opinion as well. Richard Nixon did win the Presidential elections carrying  32  States and 301 Electoral votes. Richard Nixon was an old close ally of both Hoover and the “old” military establishment, and they had the man in the White House they needed.

The 37th US President Richard Milhouse Nixon.

–

–

Nixon mentioned in the 1968 campaign that he had a secret plan  for a complete withdrawal from Vietnam. It could not be disclosed as yet. With the assassination of Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King the main obstacles for escalating the war in Vietnam were however eliminated with the anti-war movement in part being crushed, and once Nixon became US President the war in Vietnam went to full gear. Regarding the assassinations in the US on prominent people, drop by drop new revelations were allowed. Many years later Coretta Scot King (MLK’s wife) did win a wrongful death civil trial against Loyd Jowers and other unknown co-conspirators in 1999.  Jowers received $100000,- to arrange the assassination on MLK and the Jury was convinced that Government Agencies were parties to the assassination plot. It would seem that the LBJ government was involved at setting the stage of this assassination, using James Earl Ray as a scapegoat, as publicly on TV confirmed by Jowers on ABC’ Prime Time Life.  Jowers stated that both the mafia and the US Government were involved in the MLK assassination.  Reportedly Memphis police officer Lieutenant Earl Clark fired the fatal shots. The conspiracy did include J Edgar Hoover, Richard Helms, the CIA, the Memphis Police Department(MPD), Army intelligence and organised crime.  A very key person within the civil right movement was on the government payroll, responsible for infiltration and sabotage. A Jury in Memphis,TN, in November 1999 came to above conclusion after seventy witnesses testified under oath with 4000 pages of evidence, much of it was it new. The news of one of the most national security trials was suppressed by the US Government. It was clear that the 1997 reports of the House Select Committee on Assassinations re James Earl Ray justified verdict were wrong, besides other findings. Nixon’s Administration from 1974 sustained remarkable controversy over the Vietnam war. The invasion in 1970 of Cambodia and his approval of heavy bombardments on North Vietnam took his toll in the public opinion and he signed in 1973 a cease-fire. After Nixon returned from the Soviet Union, four men were arrested at the Watergate complex as due to burglary into the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee. After his reelection in 1972 the Watergate burglars were convicted and several of them implicated Nixon’s closest associates. It proved that the Watergate-break-in was only one of the several acts of both sabotage and political espionage carried out by the Nixon Administration. Nixon tried to keep away secret tapes from hearings by the “principal of separation of powers”. He had however to give many of the required tapes but not everything. The unravelling of the Nixon Presidency was unstoppable now and in 1974 the “House Judiciary Committee”started to discuss Nixon’s impeachment. It proved that Nixon had engaged in extensive domestic wiretapping apart from his questionable tax deductions through which he paid almost no federal income tax in 1973. On the 24th of July 1974 the Supreme Court ordered Nixon to give the tapes he had withheld. Those tapes were supposed to contain evidence of Nixon’s personal involvement in the Watergate operations including reflections about Watergate burglars being engaged in CIA operations. E.Howard Hunt was involved. This name will come back. The verdict was that if Nixon would not leave office on his own decision, he would be impeached, convicted and removed from office. On the 8th of August 1974 Nixon announced his resignation and Vice-President Ford was administered the Presidential oath on the 9th of August.

The 38th US President Gerald Ford. 

–

–

Ford gave Richard Nixon a full pardon in in 1974, only 1 month in office. Ford pardoned Richard Nixon completely, avoiding as such further investigations in the Watergate burglary as this would have far more implications than the public would be allowed to know. Gerald Ford has been part of the Warren Commission with the task to investigate the JFK assassination. Gerald Ford “the CIA man in Congress” had very close links with Allen Dulles, ex CIA Director who was fired by John F Kennedy.   Gerald Ford had close links with Nixon as well, in part as he became his Vice-President at a time when there was the potential that Richard Nixon could run in trouble over Watergate. However he knew Nixon before. Not only at the time of the Warren Commission, but both were for some time Republicans being on friendly terms with each other. Nixon knew that the Warren Commission was a hoax. Ford knew this as well. Both had their involvements. As mentioned Nixon reportedly ordered Ruby to kill Oswald just after the Kennedy assassination as it was clear that further hearings of Oswald would prove that Oswald was not involved at all. Jack Ruby had close connections with Nixon as he worked for him when Nixon was a fresh Congressman. Both Nixon and Ruby had close connections with the mafia and the FBI. However Ruby had to pay for it in prison, fearful for his life as he knew that Johnson and others who did orchestrate the JFK assassination were still in power and would not shy away to kill him if there was a risk that he would speak out. Ford was fully aware.Fully aware as well about the CIA/military involvement in the JFK assassination.FBI Chief Hoover was still alive at the time. We know that Spiro Agnew had to resign but his succession was for strategic reasons vital. Gerald Ford was  very close with FBI Chief Hoover. In his memoirs just before his death he revealed besides his relationship with Hoover, that the CIA was involved in the assassination on President John F Kennedy. It should be noted that Richard Nixon and George Herbert Bush (the latter US Vice-President and US President) have been integral to the Bay of Pigs operations, which became a failure under the Kennedy Administration as Kennedy based on the utterly poor intelligence information being provided, misleading actually, did not want an escalating war on Cuba.  As Vice-President, Nixon worked under President Eisenhower, together with Allen Dulles from the CIA and other senior CIA staff on the strategic planning of the Bay of Pigs. The bestselling book “Plausible Denial” by Mark Lane in 1991 reflects on both CIA involvement in JFK’s death, as part of Kennedy ignoring CIA advise to deploy American troops in Cuba. The later President Bush  was at the time of the Pay of Pigs a CIA  operative and the FBI confirmed in documents being released many years later that Bush sr was involved in the CIA briefing the day after the JFK assassination.The role of FBI Chief Hoover in the JFK assassination is most controversial as well. Gerald Ford as member of the Warren Commission leaked all confidential information to FBI Chief Hoover. The general picture is that key CIA people were involved in both the JFK and RFK assassination with Bay of Pigs links, besides Richard Nixon, Lyndon Johnson, FBI Chief Hoover and at the background H.W.Bush being involved as part of his CIA deployment at the time of the covert operation on Kennedy. Gerald Ford became US President after Richard Nixon had to resign.  Ford always defended the lone gunman theory within the identified cause of death by the Warren Commission. As reflected he had excellent relations with the FBI Chief Hoover at the time.  Deliberately and against all usual protocol he did help FBI Chief Hoover by providing him all the in’s and out’s of the Warren Commission  in private and “confidential”, as such allowing Hoover to keep an eye on those members who would perhaps not follow Allen Dulles verdict on the “lone gunman theory”. There were clearly 2 members of the Warren Commission having some reservations on both the process and the verdict and even though not all evidence reached the Warren Commission (Allen Dulles was in a position to avoid at least some part to reach the Commission), it was clear from the beginning that the CIA played a most controversial role.  Some people within the Warren Commission knew more than others and Gerald Ford  together with  FBI Chief Hoover were in full agreement that the truth should never allowed to become public. The truth was that it was an inside job from the CIA, authorised by the highest levels of the Executive branch of the US Government  (like 9/11 was a fully supported covert operation by the US Government). Hence the lone gunman theory was supposed to be the only possible allowed verdict for both the US and Congress. A hard lie to be swallowed. However Gerald Ford went on national television to defend the findings of the Warren Commission in a most convincing way. If the broader involvement of the Executive branch would be public knowledge with the people who had knowledge of the pending events on the 22rd of November 1963, this would have caused the most dramatic Constitutional crisis ever in US history at the time. The same applies to 9/11.The US would not accept one of its most popular Presidents being killed with gross government involvement. With Ford’s insight in the CIA and his “absolute pardon” for Richard Nixon, he wanted to avoid further damaging investigations in which the CIA would be exposed. Even 10 years after the Warren Commission report. The point is that the  “Watergate” burglars played a role in the Kennedy assassination as well and the CIA played a role in the Watergate break in as it was assumed that the Democratic Party had access to some top-secret documents and photographs related to the JFK assassination. Especially imaging from a police helicopter could slash the Lee Harvey Oswald theory on his involvement, besides this the later fully revealed Zapruder film ruled out the lone gunman theory.  The FBI facilitated payments meanwhile to the burglars via “the Committee to Reelect President Nixon” in 1972. H. W. Bush (the later President) was the head of this Committee and claimed until the last Nixon tapes being released that Richard Nixon was innocent, obviously not without a purpose. Bush as well had more background information about the JFK assassination and those who were involved.

FBI Chief Edward Hoover died meanwhile on the 2nd of May 1972. The acting Head of the FBI then L Patrick Gray was ordered to save the situation for Nixon and had to destroy evidence from the safe of E. Howard Hunt on his assignments and working schedule for the CIA. Hunt was both involved in Watergate and the assassination of JFK.  Because of this destruction of evidence after taking those documents from Howard Hunt’s safe,  L Patrick Gray had to resign from the FBI.   E. Howard Hunt then made claims at the White House as he wanted to avoid conviction, but after the suspicious death of his wife he did plead guilty to the Watergate burglary, being concerned about the rest of his family.

If Watergate would be reopened Howard Hunt’s case would be likely first investigated.  If he would tell everything he knew,  including all the connections he had with people connected to “The Bay of Pig crisis”, the CIA  and others, –  the JFK assassination would likely be far more important then the real Watergate burglary itself.  The RFK assassination could be well involved in this as well. Gerald Ford was fully aware of the potential implications as he was already a compromised person before he even became Vice President. Donald Kendell , President of Pepsi – Cola, was considered to be “the eyes and ears” of the CIA in Cuba. The day before the JFK assassination he was meeting with Nixon. The Watergate burglars were tied up with both the Kennedy assassination and the Bay of Pigs. At least one of the Watergate burglars was on the CIA payroll on the 17th of June 1972 (Eugenio Martinez). The other Watergate conspirators included ex- FBI agent G. Gordon Liddy, ex – CIA agents james McCord and E. Howard Hunt, Bernard Barker, Frank Sturgis and Virggilo Gonzales. Hunt being deeply involved in the Bay of Pigs operations retired later from the CIA . Several reports do show that Hunt was in Dallas on the 22nd of November 1963 when JFK was assassinated. Marita Lorenz testified under oath that she observed him paying off an assassination team in Dallas the night before the JFK murder.The latest Nixon tapes are studded with deletions, especially discussions about Hunt, the Bay of Pigs and JFK.  In May 1972 Nixon disclosed on tape to his 2 top aides that the Warren Commission was “the greatest hoax that has ever been perpetuated.”  Hunt later did admit on CIA involvement in the JFK assassination and he fingered CIA officers Cord Meyer, David Phillips, William Harvey and David Morales. See article about the 2011 assessment on the JFK assassination on the web blog.

Once becoming US President, Gerald Ford did promote Donald Rumsfeld (discussed in the chapter about G.W.Bush) to help him to set the priorities for his Presidential direction. His Nixon pardon was neither an act of courage nor an act to protect the law and the US Constitution. He was part of the club of Presidents to keep the Coupe d’Etat as it took place in 1963 secret and as we will see the military powers affecting US policy did gain the most from this. The culture in the CIA with all sorts of secret covert operations was more established now and the background powers were so strong that even with the election of a US president not fitting the picture of the CIA and the military background powers, there was a way out as we did see with Carter.

The 39th US President James Earl Carter.  

–

–    

Carter  did win with a narrow victory from the sitting President Gerald Ford. Obviously disappointing for the military background powers. It’s the problem of a Republic based on democratic principles. Sometimes there is a President not fitting the picture. However the CIA knows this and apart from the good people working in the CIA, there are people ready to help to play the game in such a way that democratic principles can be managed at the benefit of the military background powers, as we did see with Nixon. As President, Carter  balanced actually very well between  things being allowed or required and those matters not being desired or required. President Carter was however behind an Anglo-CIA conspiracy in Iran installing Khomeini and the Nullahs, based on intelligence information being provided on Khomeini staying in France at the time. Considering the outcome with Khomeini’s regime and the predicaments it caused in Iran and for the US eventually as well, in retrospect this decision may be considered as an error of judgement, however again based on  intelligence information at the time. A genuine error. There are error’s with some US President’s less genuine than they are presented. The seizure of US embassy hostages by Islāmic fundamentalists in Iran with hardly any progression in the resolution of this predicament was a major problem. CIA Director in President Carter’s time was his old class mate at the Naval Academy Stansfield Turner. Turner ceased 800 operational positions and he testified for US Congress revealing many covert CIA operations’ between late 1950ties and late 1960ties. He became very unpopular within the CIA itself.  His reform initiatives did not produce results as they were largely obstructed within the CIA.The frictions within the CIA with Turner/Carter made powerful background dynamics planning a strategy to get Carter not reelected. As it appeared the  Reagan – Bush campaign was worried that President Carter would reach a deal with Iran resulting in the release of the hostages before the elections and therefore Carter winning a second term in office. The CIA was worried as well. This would not be favourable for the military establishment. Bush had good CIA connections, based on old traditions.Hence they made their own (most compromising) deal with a close relative of Khomeini during various meetings in both Paris and Madrid. The deal did include to accept fully the Islāmic Republic and non-interference in Iran’s internal affairs. In other words whist not being in power they made a deal with Iran (with no involvement of the Carter Administration) on the terms of Iran, hence the hostage crisis deliberately delayed to allow Carter being defeated and Reagan being elected. Part of the deal was to engage later in an Iran arms deal under President Reagan, which became the Iran Contra affair. US political history and the possible dynamics are most interesting, – as we see.

The 40th US President Ronald  Reagan.

–

–

Reagan became US President after winning the Presidential elections from Carter, via illegal backdoor dealings  at the cost of hostages in Iran and at the cost of long-term security interests of the US. The Iran-Contra scandal in which the Mena Airport in Arkansas was used for illegal cocaine trafficking  with full awareness of the Federal Government and the Governor at the time in Arkansas, Bill Clinton, was part of the legacy of the pre-election arrangement with Iran.

Reportedly both George H.W Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Jeb Bush were involved in various cover up’s. Saline County prosecutor Dan Harmon was convicted of various felonies including drug and racketeering charges in 1997. He was released from prison in 2006 for helping prosecutors in a murder case. The allegations have been disputed, however former President Clinton failed in his duty to reveal the activities of the Reagan/Bush Administration to Congress.  The Iran Contra Affair during 1986/1987 became a dark issue involving illegal arms for hostage deals with Iran by Reagan’s senior staff, with his knowledge. It proved that Pointdexter and Oliver North (all part of Reagan’sNational Security Advisers) were involved in secretly facilitating the sale of arms to Iran which became into an arms – for – hostages scheme, where a portion of the profits from the sales were diverted to fund anti-sandinista and anti-communist rebels (the “Contras”), in Nicaragua.  As a result of the controversy Ronald Reagan’s  White House Chief of Staff Donald Regan and his National Security Adviser John Poindexter had to resign but it did however not affect Reagan himself.  However both he and in particular Vice-President G.W. Bush were fully aware.Interestingly some people involved in the Iran-Contra scandal  -who (nearly) convicted initially and afterwards pardoned   –  became then prominent members within the Administration of eg George W. Bush.  Elliot Abrams e.g.gained notoriety as due to most controversial decisions on foreign policy issues during the Reagan Administration on Nicaragua and El Salvador. Convicted in 1991 on 2 misdemeanor counts of unlawfully withholding information from Congress in connection with the Iran Contra Affair investigation, he was appointed on February 2, 2005, by President George W. Bush to Deputy National Security Adviser for Global Democracy Strategy. In this new position, Abrams became responsible for overseeing the National Security Council’s directorate of Democracy, “Human Rights” (we will discuss the human rights records of the former President G.W.Bush later), and International Organization Affairs and its directorate of Near East and North African Affairs. It is just one example that people owe each other in Government and the rules of justice are dealt with differently at this level.. There is still however secrecy around the Iran Contra scandal. An other example eg is Robert Michael Gates who served as the 22nd United States Secretary of Defense from 2006 to 2011. Prior to this, Gates served for 26 years in the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Council, and under President George H. W. Bush as Director of Central Intelligence.  Independent Counsel for Iran-Contra Scandal, issued on August 4, 1993, said that Gates “was close to many figures who played significant roles in the Iran/Contra affair and was in a position to have known of their activities.  Independent Counsel did not warrant indictment. In 1984, as deputy director of CIA, Gates advocated that the U.S. should start a bombing campaign against Nicaragua and that the U.S. would do everything in its power apart from direct military invasion of the country to remove the Sandinista government. Gates was however a very knowledgable man and despite some errors in retrospect it appeared he evolved quite well in his profession, at least it would seem he learnt from his mistakes.

An other important issue for later Presidential dynamics (under the Reagan Administration) was the military support of the Taliban being provided in the early 1980s. The CIA and the ISI (Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence agency) provided arms to Afghans resisting the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and the ISI assisted the process of gathering radical Muslims from around the world to fight against the Soviets. Osama Bin Laden was one of the key players in organizing training camps for the foreign Muslim volunteers. The U.S. poured funds and arms into Afghanistan, and “by 1987, 65,000 tons of U.S.-made weapons and ammunition a year were entering the war.” There have been meetings in the White House.

The 41st US President George H.W. Bush. 

–

–     

Bush,sr became elected US President after Reagan served his term for 8 years in the White House. He was faced with the Iran Contra scandal which was of a highly criminal and controversial nature, Reagan’s Vice President was George H.W.Bush. Needless to say Bush had immense experience and was generally spoken “a decent man”. However there are a few things which could have been dealt with differently. We discussed Watergate already with Bush as well. Opening Watergate investigations would open the link to Howard Hunt and if Hunt would speak about the Kennedy assassination, Nixon and all the others, – all the complexities of corrupted US governments after the JFK assassination would come to daylight. Hence  George H.W Bush’s closest business partner Bill Liedtke paid Hunt the requested $1000000,- to keep his mouth shut. Hunt got the message after his wife was killed in a mysterious plane crash. Bush had close connections with Liedtke via the Zapata Corporation. As reflected both former President Bush, Nixon and Johnson had joint interest and involvement in the Kennedy assassination. Those connections have been always there. Bush and the CIA had close links in the “Bay of Pigs” association. President Herbert Walker Bush as Vice President under President Reagan had an important role at the background and he was perhaps the smarter guy, not necessarily the better man.. There were many private sessions like his son the later President George W bush had with Vice President Cheney , the last presenting his arguments and whisper in the President’s ear.   So had Reagan H W. Bush the Vice President presenting arguments and whisper in his ear. Interestingly the later Vice-President Cheney’s firm Halliburton, Brown & Root in part financed Permindex. The last is the Corporate Front which operated the assassination on John F Kennedy. Like Bush, Ford was a member of Delta Kappa Epsilon Fraternity – a secret society.

Bush was a member of Skull and Bones as well, again a different secret organisation. “I think Skull and Bones has had slightly more success than the mafia in the sense that the leaders of the five families are all doing 100 years in jail, and the leaders of the Skull and Bones families are doing four and eight years in the White House,” says Rosenbaum..

On August 1, 1990, Iraq, led by Saddam Hussein, invaded  Kuwait. Bush “unhappy” with the invasion despite clearly favouring Iraq above Iran, began rallying opposition to Iraq in the US and among European, Asian, and Middle Eastern allies. Secretary of Defense Richard Bruce “Dick” Cheney traveled to Saudi Arabia to meet with King Fahd. Fahd clearly fearing a possible invasion of his country by Iraq as well, requested US military aid. The request was met in the affirmative and Air Force fighter jets arrived. Iraq tried to negotiate a deal allowing its country to take control of half of Kuwait. Bush rejected this proposal and wanted a complete withdrawal of Iraqi forces. The planning of a ground operation by US-led coalition forces started in September 1990.  General Norman Schwarzkopf was nominated to lead those forces.  At a joint session of  US Congress on the authorization of air and land attacks, Bush spelled out the immediate goals: “Iraq must withdraw from Kuwait completely, immediately, and without condition. Kuwait’s legitimate government must be restored. The security and stability of the Persian Gulf must be assured. And American citizens abroad must be protected.” A  fifth  long-term goal was the following: “Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective – a new world order – can emerge: a new era – free from the threat of terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice, and more secure in the quest for peace. An era in which the nations of the world, East and West, North and South, can prosper and live in harmony…. A world where the rule of law is stronger than  the rule of the jungle. A world in which nations recognize the shared responsibility for freedom and justice. A world where the strong respect the rights of the weak.” With the United Nations Security Council opposed to Iraq’s violence, Congress authorized the Use of Military force with a set goal of returning control of Kuwait to the Kuwaiti government, and protecting America’s interests abroad.

In retrospect Bush gave himself an A- for Desert Storm, allowing that “there are certain things that I could have done better.” In truth, Desert Storm merits far less than this.The cease-fire ending the war was poorly managed.The slaughter on the “Highway of Death,” along which the Iraqis retreating from Kuwait, simply decided Bush to stop the war. Before the Iraq war, Bush’s ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie, agreed with the President’s wish to “moderate” Saddam Hussein with incentives to get an ally in him against Iran. Secretary of State Baker dropped a line in July 1990 indicated “to take no position on the border delineation issue raised by Iraq with respect to Kuwait.” Saddam was threatening Kuwait with war if the Emir did not surrender (oil-producing) territory on his border with Iraq and forgive $14 billion in Iraqi debt. Bush and Baker’s failure to deliver a firm and clear warning to Baghdad may have been a sign to Saddam that he could go ahead. He saw an opportunity in Baker’s apparent indifference on the border issue. If he left Kuwait largely intact, but annexed Kuwaiti oil fields and one or two of Kuwait’s islands, perhaps the Bush administration would permit this. It is this profound lack of clarity in the Middle East which contributed to the first Iraq war. Bush stopped all military activity in Iraq at once and did not pursue deposing Saddam Hussein, as part of a well known policy of duplicity. Saddam Hussein in the US perception could still be a potential ally against Iran, but this was a serious error of judgement, becoming more clear during the Clinton Administration. Likewise the support being provided in Afghanistan was very dubious and provided the seeds for all sorts of dynamics being difficult to control, apart from increasing the risk of terror due to self-inflicted foreign policy not being principle centred.   Regarding the 2011 situation in Afghanistan note that current President Karzai of Afghanistan worked for former US President G.H Bush and there were longstanding Taliban connections.

The 42nd US President William Jefferson “Bill” Clinton.

–

–

Clinton took over from G.H Bush as US President. There is no point in discussing the Lewinsky matter as within the bigger picture of his Presidency this is profound trivial. There was however one thing to be noted in this matter. He could lie until the bitter end, and he seemed to be very convincing in his lies. Compromised already over the Iran-Contra scandal in which an airport in Arkansas (Mena) was used for a large illegal CIA operation, involving large quantities of drugs to be sold with the profits to be transferred to a fund to support the Contras. – Clinton always argued that this has been a federal issue and that he was not involved. However as reflected he failed to report, he failed to respond to both requests from the public and attorneys to facilitate proper investigations.The controversy is quite clear and the incriminating reason is that he did neither act in terms of facilitating Congress to make formal enquiries and investigations, nor did he support the legal system to do its work once this was requested in his own State where he was the Governor of State.

The way the Clinton Administration dealt with the terror threat in the face of the 9/11 attack due to be happening  at the beginning of the Bush,jr Administration is an interesting question. We touched on this subject at the beginning.

Did this attack came totally out of the blue?  – – Clinton always defended the Government’s position, including the outcome of the 9/11 Commission and the way information was provided to Condoleezza Rice (National Security Advisor under President G.W Bush). On the 19th of July 2004 it was announced that the U.S. Justice Department was investigating Sandy Berger (US National Security Adviser &  Foreign Policy Adviser during the Bill Clinton Administration) for unauthorized removal of classified documents in October 2003 from a National Archives reading room before testifying before the 9/11 Commission. The documents were five classified copies of a single report commissioned by Richard Clarke,  detailing various internal assessments of the Clinton administration’s handling of the 2000 millennium attack plots. An associate of Berger said that Berger took one copy in September 2003 and four copies in October 2003^. After a long investigation, Justice Department prosecutors determined that Berger only removed classified copies of material stored on hard drives from  the National Archives, and that no original material was destroyed.  Berger eventually pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of unauthorized removal and retention of classified material on the 1st of April 2005. We need to consider that those issues have been discussed between Clinton and Berger, and that Berger was prepared to do this on behalf of the former US President.  There are however mixed story’s whether all material returned and that nothing, not even a fraction  did not return.Vital information was at stake.The Justice Department initially said Berger stole only copies of classified documents and not originals.The House Government Reform Committee however later revealed that an unsupervised Berger had been given access to classified files of originals, not copied, not inventoried documents on terrorism. Several Archives officials acknowledged that Berger could have stolen any number of items and they “would never know what, if any, original documents were missing.” According to the House report, Clinton “designated Berger in 2002 as his representative to check NSC documents” to the 9/11 inquiry. Berger made four trips to the National Archives.  He did so likely to refresh his memory before testifying first to the Graham-Goss Commission and then to the 9/11 Commission. Berger made his first visit in May 2002, his last in October 2003. He was allowed to have unprotected access and it is not clear who did approve this. We know that part of the 9/11 investigations  took place behind strict closed doors and that the “behind closed doors conversations” with Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Clinton and al Gore were all “private and confidential”, touching base on national security. Reportedly Berger destroyed some documents during his four visits.  “The full extent of Berger’s document removal,” reports the House Committee, “is not known and never can be known.” Brachfeld met with DOJ attorney Howard Sklamberg. Obviously concerned that Berger had obstructed the 9/11 Commission’s work, Brachfeld wanted assurance that the Commission knew of Berger’s crime and the potential ramifications of it. The 9/11 Commission was not informed. On the 22nd of March, two days before Berger’s public testimony, senior DOJ attorneys John Dion and Bruce Swartz got back to Brachfeld. They told him that the DOJ was not going to tell the 9/11 Commission of the Berger investigation before Berger’s appearance. It would seem somebody ordered the DOJ not to tell the 9/11 Commission on purpose. It is not clear who ordered the DOJ. We can’t help it to think that to keep Clinton’s version of events leading up to 9/11, (for which he had to testify privately) he had dispatched Sandy Berger to the National Archives, at the risk of Berger’s career and reputation, and to edit the official record. If we look at the broader context of Clinton being a person trying to hide vital matters becoming public (like he did with the Iran Contra scandal and the CIA activities at Mena airport in Arkansas), –  this is a reasonable assumption.

There are matters to be searched, revealing however that there were  reasons to have those discussions behind closed doors as it was felt that the public should not know. It is good that the “freedom of information act” provides via the internet various links for those being interested to do serious research, accepting however that some matters however will not be known. It proves however that the American public has been fooled on various matters the last 50 years.

The 43rd US President George W Bush.

–

–

“Bush, jr”  took over from Bill Clinton as US President. Only 3 months in office in 2001 a terrorist attack took place on New York and Washington which implicated a dramatic change on US foreign policy. I touched base on this issue at the beginning of this “epilogue”.  G.W. Bush was surrounded by former aides and veterans including Cheney, Powell, Card, Rice and a few more. Bush, sr did influence his son’s administration from behind the scenes. The Bushes “have a long memory”, as Dick Cheney liked to remind people privately.

Following the September 11, 2001 attacks, Cheney was vital in providing the primary justification for entering into a second war with Iraq. Cheney assisted to shape Bush’s approach to the “War on Terrorism“, alleging in various public statements that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. He made many personal visits to CIA headquarters, where he questioned mid-level agency analysts on their conclusions. Cheney insisted to allege links between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda, even though classified President’s Daily Brief on September 21, 2001 reflected that the U.S. intelligence community had neither evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the September 11th attacks nor  “scant credible evidence” that Iraq had any significant collaborative ties with Al Qaeda. Cheney has been characterized as the most powerful and influential Vice President in history. After the September 11, 2001 attacks, Rumsfeld provided the military planning and implementation of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan and the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Rumsfeld highly favoured to send both the smallest and effective force as possible for both conflicts, a concept called “the Rumsfeld Doctrine.”

The G.W Bush Presidency was dominated by the war against terrorism, including both the war in Afghanistan and Iraq. On the morning of 9/11, Rumsfeld spoke at a Pentagon breakfast meeting. According to his later description to Larry King, he stated at the meeting that “sometime in the next two, four, six, eight, ten, twelve months there would be an event that would occur in the world that would be sufficiently shocking that it would remind people again how important it is to have a strong healthy defense department that contributes to… that underpins peace and stability in our world. And that is what underpins peace and stability.” It sounds too good to be true. The day before Rumsfeld declared officially that over 2.4 trillion dollars could not be accounted for in the US military budget. It “disappeared”  and 9/11 prevented further investigations in this.  A loss of  2.4 trillion dollar in the military budget  (not being accounted for) does not reflect the best accounting system at the Defence Department. The issue has not been raised in the Senate at the required level of investigations till so far. However a 2,4 trillion loss in the military budget should raise more than only a few eyebrows.

Less than 3 hours after the start of the first hijacking and two hours after American Airlines Flight 11 striking the World Trade Center, Rumsfeld increased the US defense condition to DEFCON 3; the highest it had ever been since the Arab-Israeli war in 1973. On September 11, Rumsfeld was at 2:40 pm issuing rapid orders to his associates to find for evidence of Iraqi involvement, according to notes taken by senior policy official Stephen Cambone. “Best info fast. Judge whether good enough hit S.H.” — meaning Saddam Hussein — “at same time. Not only UBL” (Osama bin Laden), Cambone’s notes quoted Rumsfeld as saying. “Need to move swiftly — Near term target needs — go massive — sweep it all up. Things related and not.” Bush announced a global War on Terror after the 11 September attacks. The Afghan Taliban regime was unable to get Osama bin Laden, which provided Bush a reason to order the invasion of Afghanistan and overthrow the Taliban regime. As reflected at the beginning  G.W.Bush deliberately missed his chance to get bin-Laden at an earlier stage and with the assassination on Massoud,  on purpose he messed up things in Afghanistan, – just to facilitate the pending attack from al-Qaeda to provide his Administration a reason to go to war against both al-Qaeda and the Taliban. Bombs were well positioned at the base of all WTC buildings before the al-Qaeda attack, to make the impact worse (at the cost of many American lives!).

It shows that nothing has changed since the JFK assassination. It would seem in such covert operations nearly anything is allowed as long as “the cover up systems” work properly, which they did. The 9/11 Commission conclusions were misleading.   In his 2002 State of the Union Address, at the end of January, Bush asserted that an “axis of evil” consisting of North Korea, Iran, and Iraq was “arming to threaten the peace of the world” and “pose a grave and growing danger”. The Bush Administration proclaimed to have a right and an obligation to engage in preëmptive war, also called preventive war, in response to all those perceived threats. This would  become the Bush Doctrine. It should be noted however that the general Bush doctrine proved to be a greater danger to peace in the world. Allies have been misled and are still fighting in a war which could have been prevented, as illustrated earlier.

Reportedly later, cities subjected to allied bombing had uranium concentrations at 400% to 2000% above normal, with birth defects sharply increasing. During the 2003 invasion of Iraq, US and British forces used an estimated 1,100-2,200 tons of depleted uranium weaponry, with unimaginable future health implications for both Iraqi and coalition military forces. Despite the Cold War’s being finished, the Bush administration has spent at least 12 times more on developing nuclear weapons than on securing/reducing existing stockpiles or on non-proliferation efforts. The Bush Administration has also repealed the ban on low-yield nuclear weapons, rejected international non-proliferation agreements, and pushed stockpiles of the so-called “bunker buster” which in fact is a nuclear weapon. Not to speak about extensive chemical warfare programs in preparation and exercised already at various locations.

We know the history. Mid-1979, at about the same time as the Soviet Union had their war in Afghanistan, the United States gave several hundred million dollars a year to the Afghan Mujahideen insurgents fighting for the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan and against  the Soviet Army in Operation Cyclone. Along with native Afghan mujahideen were Muslim volunteers from other countries, popularly known as Afghan Arabs. The most famous of the Afghan Arabs was Osama bin Laden, known at the time as a wealthy and pious Saudi who provided his own money and helped raise millions from other wealthy Gulf Arabs.

Various warnings of a pending attack were ignored.  The September 11 attacks was not an intelligence “failure”. Intelligence deliberately allowed it to happen.  As some would say: “The actors may have been foreign. But the stage directors seem to have been all along here in the U.S.”   The purpose was to try and get both public and Senate approval to go to war.

For many years before the CIA supported the Mujahideen by spending the taxpayers’ money, billions of dollars of it over the years, on buying arms, ammunition, and equipment. It was their secret arms procurement branch that was kept busy. It was, however, a cardinal rule of Pakistan’s policy that no Americans ever become involved with the distribution of funds or arms once they arrived in the country. No Americans ever trained or had direct contact with the mujahideen, and no American official ever went inside Afghanistan^“. Interesting was the earlier mentioned Osama bin Laden, who had a leading role with mutual support from the US. However the war with the Soviets neared its end, with a CIA build up of activity in this area and more CIA demands on the bin Laden network. After he felt likely betrayed and profoundly intimidated, Bin Laden organized  al-Qaeda to carry out jihad, mainly against the United States this time— the country that had helped fund the Mujahideen against the Soviets. Many commentators have described Al-Qaeda attacks as blowback or an unintended consequence of American aid to the Mujahideen. In response, the US Government,the CIA and Pakistani intelligence officials involved in the operation, and at least one journalist (Peter Bergen) have denied this theory. It was said that the aid was given out by the Pakistan government, and that it went to Afghan not foreign Mujahideen, and that there was no contact between the Afghan Arabs and the CIA or other American officials. Perhaps we need to take such statements with a pinch of salt. The BBC, in an article published shortly after the 9/11 attacks, stated that Bin Laden “received security training from the CIA itself, according to Middle Eastern analyst Hazhir Teimourian.” In a 2004 BBC article entitled “al-Qaeda’s origins and links”, the BBC wrote: “During the anti-Soviet jihad Bin Laden and his fighters received American and Saudi funding. Some analysts believe Bin Laden himself had security training from the CIA^“. The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation published in 2006 that: “Bin Laden apparently received training from the CIA, which was backing the Afghan holy warriors – the mujahedeen – who were tying down Soviet forces in Afghanistan”. An article in Der Spiegel, entitled “Arming the Middle East”, Siegesmund von Ilsemann called Bin Laden in 2007″one of the CIA’s best weapons customers”.The CIA and the US Government til so far denied any connections. The UK Foreign Secretary Robin Cook, from 1997–2001, and Leader of the House of Commons and Lord President of the Council from 2001-2003, believed the CIA provided arms to the Arab Mujahideen, including Osama bin Laden, writing, “Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies.

Let’s face it, the US Government should have never opted to support Bin Laden with his support network against the Soviets at the time. The US and the Soviet Union were just in the process of reaching the most positive developments since decades, and the US Government and CIA supporting Bin Laden and his network against the Soviet Union was part of a policy full of duplicity and undermining activity. The US Government has been responsible for this and the terror from al Qaeda was as such self-inflicted terror. The US should have never been there in the first instance. US Presidents who would have acted with wisdom and restraint should have never allowed to get the CIA with covert operations supporting a foreign policy full of duplicity and deception. The management on those issues under various President’s has been profound repugnant considering all the implications. However it was G.W.Bush’s choice to take Massoud out of the picture and give “the green light” to 9/11. He was aware that this was going to happen and as Rumsfeld reflected in an interview, if America was under attack from terrorists, this would change the perception of the American public. The question could be raised: who were the real terrorists?

The 9/11 Commission was as much a farce as the Warren Commission was at the time of the Kennedy assassination. There has been compelling evidence that controlled demolition brought down buildings 1,2 and 7, based on thorough research and analysis. Bush, Ashcroft, FBI director said that the 9/11 attacks were not preventable, but the reality was that both those attacks and the controlled demolitions were preventable. FBI Director Bob Mueller allowed crucial steel evidence from the World Trade Centre to be destroyed as part of a criminal conspiracy at the Department of Justice to destroy evidence that could expose people behind the “false – flag terrorism of 9/11”. TIME Magazine did raise serious questions about the dealings of Bob Mueller. There are at least 11 remarkable facts about 9/11 in contrast with the outcome from the 9/11 Commission. It would need a full article to reflect on this but “Architects & Engineers for 9/11 truth did elaborate in detail on this.The mysterious collapse of WTC 7 has never been answered for. It was this building being loaded with Intelligence information going down without any impact of either projectile or plane. 48 % of New Yorker’s support investigation of WTC7. Many many US Military Officers did join a request  apart of millions of other US citizens to reopen thorough,impartial, open and transparent investigations. Those requests have been ignored till so far. Even President Barack Obama does not want to have any controversy about the outcome of the 9/11 Commission, as the base of going to war in Afghanistan would fall flat on its face in the eyes of the world with all those allies and soldiers from different countries being involved already. As due to the Bush Administration a problem was created there, and the Bush doctrine did not do anything else than increasing the risk of terror, with Pakistan even being ready to sell nuclear information elsewhere. It’s a potential minefield which requires a solution, but let’s put it (again!) in this way:  The war in Afghanistan was an ill selected war, based on criminal acts in which the US Government was involved. The way dynamics were both constructed and in part fabricated are a reflection of the worst possible foreign policy of the US as a superpower. Like the Kennedy assassination has never been resolved,  – 10 years after 9/11  it  would seem to be still acceptable what Bush, Cheney and Romsfeld inflicted on the US and other countries. They simply could walk away from it with prolonged government protection. Despite many people at the highest level of military service and it various other levels of society requesting 9/11 to be again investigated, it simply did not happen. The secrets of the real background of the 9/11 drama being the cause for 2 pointless wars, based on various criminal activity are still due to be revealed, perhaps after 50 years. History is repeating itself in different identities because the main problem has not been resolved and this is the US Government, – insufficient controlled by the legislative powers with insufficient law enforcement.

We know about the defining moments of the post 9/11 era. We know about the testimony of Norman Mineta before the 9/11 Commission leaving compelling questions about former Vice President Dick Cheney’s actions on the day of 9/11 in terms of a “stand down in security.” His testimony was suppressed by the 9/11 Commission. The 9/11 Chair at least concluded that the attack was preventable. We know as well that apart from many others former FBI Director Louis J.Freeh slammed the 9/11 Commission conclusions as well. But let’s for a moment forget about the 9/11 Commission. 

Major top people of the military intelligence confirm 2009 Bio-WMD Genocide. Bush did admit to illegal concentration camps. Widespread abuses of human rights.  During his Administration under the guise of national security there have been wide-spread dangerous aerosol and electromagnetic operations. Chemtrails and terror in the age of potential nuclear war.

 

People and Governments can refuse to face the truth as long as they want, but at some stage the truth and justice hopefully will catch up on them. There are enough US citizens unhappy about the undercurrents of their Government, the lack of transparency of wars eg in Afghanistan and the real reasoning for this based on pure historical facts, the last being different from the facts presented by the CIA.

Truman warned for the CIA and the power of the military establishment, so did Eisenhower and so did Kennedy. There is a major US budget deficit at present, largely based on the legacy of an unbelievable foreign policy for various decades. Even politicians tend to look only at short-term solutions, the cut corners strategy, without realising how much impact the self-inflicted past had on the US as a credible nation. What was left, G.W.Bush destroyed it. 

Both the wars in Vietnam  and Iraq and Afghanistan were not required and could have been prevented. It did cost millions of lives and trillions of dollars and did not give real security for the US.

Many Germans during the second world war did not know about the secret concentration camps. “We did not know”, was what you heard after the second world war. The US did work at the right end of the moral spectrum at the time, did act at the right end of the moral spectrum many times. However if you look at the horror inflicted by various Administrations after the JFK assassination there is no easy way to say that the US with an “over established military establishment” seems as much at risk for creating major war’s as some other countries. The problem lies at the Executive Branch and the background powers.

Where airplane crashes get enough investigations, failed and corrupt US Presidents are able to escape with everything they inflicted. This system of US Presidents not being accountable in retrospect is wrong and as long as the US opts not to change it, it is responsible for the implications in the future.

With President Barack Obama being elected US President in November 2008,  there appeared to be a new beginning as he has his roots in the movement for change and social justice, but he will be  perceived by the establishment as a potential danger if he is not in line with the military strategic direction. Both parties are still able to reason and Obama is well positioned for some change. Sometimes it takes 2 terms as US President to turn the tide as due to past failures under earlier Administrations, but the road to justice is slow and full of obstacles. With an economy in recession again and a world full of dangers it is vital to have adequate intelligence from existing Agencies, but besides this a fair degree of common sense and value systems as part of principle centred leadership are important. Even though the economic prospects are not great at present the US is best served with its current leadership at present. We may not always understand why President Obama  is managing certain areas in the way he does, why he awards eg former US President George H.W.Bush with the “Presidential medal of Freedom”, but his position does involve a lot of protocol to avoid enemies and he knows the art of politics. However when it comes to real principles to protect the country from senseless war’s or criminal covert operations he will neither hesitate nor compromise his intentions to keep the bigger picture in mind. His perceptions and expectations on the US Presidency have been perhaps not always realistic, but working with “the circles” in Washington is complex business after people have been able to digest the material discussed in the above in more sustained ways. We did see this with the 35th US President, who had too many enemies at once, who should have selected a different Vice President at an earlier stage. If Kennedy would not have had risky liaisons with various women he could have replaced Hoover, as Kennedy was vulnerable to the blackmail of Hoover. Integrity is a big thing, both at the personal level and the  level of business. Kennedy was a great President but he was not without failures. The difference between Kennedy,Obama and Carter despite their differences is that none of them had criminal intends or criminal backgrounds, whilst this can’t be said about some other US Presidents in the past.

–

–

The sad thing is that the Executive Branch of the US can have at times profound criminal infestation and that legislation is required to protect the US against itself from this point of view, besides legislation to keep the powers of both the Pentagon and the CIA in place by proper law enforcement, with the application of justice systems  for all and not injustice being tolerated for the few who support the establishment. The US Executive Branch as a whole needs to protect both the law and the Constitution, not by means of lip service, but as an ongoing effort of principle centred leadership to bring its own house “the United States of America” in order. There is both too much at stake in America and the world and the unfortunate legacy of the past needs to be a learning curve for the future. It means that the past should not repeat itself, should not allowed to repeat itself, as the operating business of the United States Government in the world as we face it to-day needs to contribute to the survival of human race, stability and economic recovery.

Like Kennedy during the Cuban missile crisis in 1962 saved the world somehow from a nuclear holocaust by ignoring aggressive proposals from his generals, Nixon would have taken those proposals on board and Cuba would have been attacked with nuclear retaliation from the Russian commanders in Cuba who were under instruction to fire nuclear missiles to all major cities in the US if  the US would attack Cuba.

The wrong US President when the dangers are really near and grave can even make a just war an unjust holocaust, and then we don’t speak about some unjust wars from the past. The US until Obama has been really very poorly prepared on a more positive contribution to a world with less violence, as the systems of government despite the glamour did not match the reality of the problems. The problems are far more grave because the US did contribute to those problems in sustained ways.  This epilogue is a summary of lessons from Presidential Administrations and the average score is not high as leadership at this level was neither principle centred nor in particular based on values.  At the point as where to exercise the available freedom of the world’s most powerful democracy in the more positive when this was possible to do so in the positive, a better example of the US  could have been reasonably expected, – as such an example proved not always to be possible in countries with different systems of government. Democracy in the US worked neither perfect nor optimal with even significant media control.

US Administrations “have slept” with dictators, feeding them with military intelligence including nuclear energy. The Clinton appeasement program e.g.for North Korea included hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, food, oil and even a nuclear reactor. The agreement was however flawed and lacked even the most basic means of verification. In 2010 North Korea reportedly was/is using companies to export nuclear and missile technology to Burma, Syria and Iran. China is a significant culprit as well in exporting nuclear technology. More countries are culprits for exporting such technology which will lead to a menace of uncontrolled violence, if the most powerful nations do not get their act together and stop this build up of explosives destroying the world eventually.

A policy of duplicity based on secrecy and the criminal use of  Covert operation‘s will add to the risks of our global community if the aim of any US covert operation is not the prevention of either war or terror.

There is no protection, for any nation on earth against the massacre of a nuclear and biochemical holocaust and preparing for this does not mean a survival of the fittest, but destruction of even the strongest. The wrong US President at the most unfortunate time could contribute to the event of such a holocaust, whilst at the same time such a holocaust could have been prevented by a longstanding and consistent US foreign policy history, inspiring a world-wide principle centred example of “risk reduction”. With some variations it never happened as such, as US foreign policy was largely based on short-term gain and often creating long-term pain at a cost of trillions of dollars, – some trillions not even accounted for.

The vital issue at the Executive branch of the US is that decisions being made are based on sound principles, that foreign policy is based on integrity, and that the US President has the ability to keep the bigger picture in mind, and acts with wisdom and restraint. Only a few US Presidents  have being able to act with both this wisdom, integrity and restraint,  and in the world of today we need this more than ever before.

“Profiles in US Presidential Violations of Justice” did give an insight in some US President’s  between the 22nd of November 1963 and the 20th of January 2009. The facts are sobering and offer some history on vital Presidential choices which could have been exercised differently at the time.  Those choices do show on the character and integrity of those being in power, they do reflect as well on the rare application of courage to offer resistance against undermining elements in democracies.

Some US leaders did allow or even order assassinations  (both in the US as elsewhere)  to protect their cause of action, not being a noble cause to prevent war, – but a cause to mislead and secure the position of those who desired this to hold on to power. The last not being deserved. Sometimes the only aim was to protect the very own position of the US President himself. Democracy proved not to offer protection against this sort of injustice as the justice systems itself proved to be infiltrated and violated by those supposed to protect them. Media control did help to mislead the public.

Justice should not be “the cut corner strategy” from the past at the cost of millions who died in vain, without compassion and wisdom of their leaders. Leaders who did use the military arm of US powers to infiltrate by night and kill by day, either by war, by terror inflicted, -or covert operations being endured by far too many.

The greatest injustice is the potential of  a collective  Nuclear holocaust being created by various leaders around the globe.Those who do represent us in government are neither entitled nor obligated to use this potential for self-destruction, either by choice, by error or by twisting the facts and provoke as such a self-destructive longstanding Nuclear winter where the prospect on the continuation of life on earth is nearly limited to zero.

As a people who do inhabit this globe, we are created as part of collective energies during a moment in time. We are just an impulse of this universe, during our time and all times, – coming and going, sharing our common humanity. We inhabit this planet with all the creative energies, with all the universal principles, to protect and to preserve.  The last with leadership, – and not the management of further break down and destruction – with an increasing amount of Weapons of mass destruction spreading across the globe, eventually to be used at a large unpredictable scale.

In a larger sense, it is for us the living to be meaningful dedicated to the unfinished task still remaining, to prevent the agony of war and improve the civil rights of others, –  with similar devotion as those who died in vain, for both the wrong purpose and the wrong means being used as part of the decisions of some of those US President’s who could have done differently. Some US Presidents did neither have the courage nor the devotion to lead by principle, – guided by intrinsic justice and compassion in the larger sense as part of our International Relations here on earth. The same can be said about various other countries with different systems of government. The difference however is that the US is a Republic based on democratic principles and a sound Constitution, which raised higher expectations.

–

Thank you!

–

 Paul 

–
Paul Alexander Wolf

–

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7h5-eNd6QEI&feature=player_detailpage      

 >   A  strategy  of  peace:  John  Fitzgerald  Kennedy,  the  35th  US  President <

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2013/01/06/we-dream-of-things-that-never-were-and-say-why-not/

–

Profiles In US Presidential Violations of Justice – Front page (Part 1 of 11) on July 5, 2011

Related articles

• Re-Investigation Of 9/11 Campaign Gains World Momentum: Italy Supreme Court Submits U.S. 9/11 Crimes Against Humanity To International Criminal Tribunal! (politicalvelcraft.org)
• Saudi Arabia added to 9/11 lawsuit (miamiherald.com)
• Federal judge says NSA phone data collection is constitutional (businessmirror.com.ph)
• Federal judge says NSA phone data collection is constitutional (businessmirror.com.ph)
• Muslim Brotherhood: A history of terror (dailynewsegypt.com)
• Saudi-Sized Cracks in the 9/11 Wall of Silence (whowhatwhy.com)
• Who really killed President John F. Kennedy? (tararualibrary.wordpress.com)
• CIA & FBI: Cheney Lied About 9/11 Hijacker (ritholtz.com)
• Inside the Saudi 9/11 cover-up – New York Post (prayingforoneday.wordpress.com)
• The 9/11 Commission: A Victim of Cheney’s Torture Program (ritholtz.com)

US Presidential profiles in violations of Justice (Part 5 – former President Ford)

English: The swearing in of President Gerald Ford by Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger. Français : Gerald Ford serrant la main de Warren Burger le chef de la Cour Suprême des états-Unis (1974). (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The 38th US President Gerald Rudolph Ford:   “An American tragedy in which we all have played a  part” – “If Lincoln were alive today, he’d be turning over in his grave.”  – Gerald R. Ford.

Born in 1913 in Omaha, Nebraska, he studied law at Yale and during the Second World War he served in the US Navy. He became a member of the House of Representatives for the Republican Party from 1949 to 1973.   By 1965 he became the minority leader.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RCczaSKs9Y&feature=player_detailpage            ( Lyndon Johnson tapes: Gerald Ford on Warren Commission)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eZfS-oly10&feature=player_detailpage                 (Gerald Ford confirms CIA involvement in the JFK assassination)

He was appointed Vice-President under President Richard Nixon after the resignation of Spiro Agnew in 1973. When President Richard Nixon resigned over the Watergate scandal Gerald Ford became the new President, obviously as such without electoral mandate.  He was pushed to this highest office in the US without knowing at the time of becoming Vice President that this would be his fate in the future.  He took this office on his shoulders with the responsibilities neither he nor his wife really wanted, but obviously he did it and got a lot of praise. His controversial decision to give Richard Nixon a full pardon and as such avoiding any further Watergate investigations, besides the problems in the US economy at the time, contributed generally to a low-level popularity. The further details will be discussed later in this article.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_r2T9IlXYUM&feature=player_detailpage                      (Gerald Ford’s testimony on the  Pardon of Richard Nixon – Part 10)

US Congress during his Presidency was dominated by the Democratic Party, and both his external and domestic policy plan’s were rejected. He served only 2 years as US President and during the 1976 Presidential elections he was defeated by Jimmy Carter.

One of his publications after his Presidency was “Humor and the Presidency” in 1987. In his memoirs just before his death he revealed that the CIA was involved in the assassination on President John F Kennedy.  Speaking in retrospect, his first publication dit fit him quite well as he had a friendly sense of humor and note that he was generally well liked, regardless his controversial decision to give Richard Nixon a full Presidential pardon for what he inflicted during his years in the White house.

Interestingly he did receive for this “Presidential Nixon Pardon”  ‘The Profile in Courage Award” at the Kennedy Library in Boston in May 2001. Why this is so interesting will be revealed later in this article as it will be clear that the perceptions on this Presidential Pardon are different, or at least valued differently.

Gerald Ford took over as the  38th US President after serving under Nixon since the 12th of October 1973 as his Vice President.  The former Vice-President at the time Spiro Agnew  resigned on the 10th of October as due to proven corruption and Nixon asked both Congress and Hoover (FBI Chief)  for advise about the succession of Vice President Agnew.

Gerald Ford had an impressive background with both good relations within the CIA and the FBI.  Only 10 years before he served within the Warren Commission. The Warren Commission initiated under President Johnson had the purpose to reach a conclusion on those involved in the assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy.  As most of us know in retrospect,  – the purpose of the Warren Commission was to suppress the truth on the JFK assassination.  Ford was once called “the CIA man” in Congress.

Only one month into his Presidency,  Ford pardoned Richard Nixon completely avoiding as such further investigations into the Watergate scandal.  Some assumed this was an act of courage whilst others criticised Ford for doing this. What we know is that he took this decision within the first 100 days in office without – reportedly – consultation with any of his staff or other advisers.

Was the background of this decision a real act of moral courage or was there more to this decision? He made the decision reportedly on his own, based on his knowledge and his own assessment of the situation.

Let’s go back to Gerald Ford’s  role  in the Warren Commission.  Ford always defended the lone gunman theory within the identified cause of death by the Warren Commission. He had excellent relations with the FBI Chief Hoover at the time.  Deliberately and against all usual protocol he did help FBI Chief Hoover by providing him all the in’s and out’s of the Warren Commission  in private and “confidential”, as such allowing Hoover to keep an eye on those members who would perhaps not follow Allen Dulles verdict on the “lone gunman theory”. There were clearly 2 members of the Warren Commission having some reservations on both the process and the verdict and even though not all evidence reached the Warren Commission (Allen Dulles was in a place to avoid at least some part to reach the Commission), it was clear from the beginning that the CIA played a most controversial role.  Some people within the Warren Commission knew more than others and Gerald Ford (“the CIA man in Congress”)  together with the FBI Chief Hoover was in full agreement that the truth should never allowed to become public. The truth was that it was an inside job from the CIA, authorised by the highest levels of the Executive branch of the US Government.  Hence the lone gunman theory was supposed to be the only possible allowed verdict for both the US and Congress. A hard lie to be swallowed. However Gerald Ford went on national television to defend the findings of the Warren Commission in a convincing way.

If the broader involvement of the Executive branch would be public knowledge with the people who had knowledge of the pending events on the 22nd of November 1963, this would have cause the most dramatic Constitutional crisis ever in US history at the time. The US would not accept one of its most popular Presidents being killed with gross government involvement. With Ford’s insight in the CIA and his “absolute pardon” for Richard Nixon, he wanted to avoid further damaging investigations in which the CIA would be exposed. Even 10 years after the Warren Commission report.

The point is that the  “Watergate” burglars played a role in the Kennedy assassination as well and the CIA played a role in the Watergate break in as it was assumed that the Democratic Party had access to some top-secret documents and photographs related to the JFK assassination. Especially imaging from a police helicopter would slash the Lee Harvey Oswald theory on his involvement, besides the fact the latter fully revealed Zapruder film ruled out the lone gunman theory.  The Watergate burglary took place on the 28th of May and the 17th of June 1972.

Nixon used the provisions of the 25th Amendment to nominate Gerald Ford as his new Vice President. The FBI facilitated payments meanwhile to the burglars via “the Committee to Reelect President Nixon” in 1972. H. W. Bush (the later President) was the head of this Committee and claimed until the last Nixon tapes being released that Richard Nixon was innocent. The question as well is whether the later President H.W. Bush was completely honest in his assessment of President Nixon being innocent at the time, as history shows in its facts and documentation that H.W. Bush had more background information about the JFK assassination and those who were involved.

FBI Chief Edward Hoover died meanwhile on the 2nd of May 1972. The acting Head of the FBI then L Patrick Gray was ordered to save the situation for Nixon and had to destroy evidence from the safe of Howard Hunt on his assignments and working schedule for the CIA. Hunt was both involved in Watergate and the assassination of JFK.  Because of this destruction of evidence after taking those documents from Howard Hunt’s safe,  L Patrick Gray had to resign from the FBI.   E Howard Hunt then made claims at the White House as he wanted to avoid conviction, but after the suspicious death of his wife he did plead guilty to the Watergate burglary, being concerned about the rest of his family.

Coming back on history: with Gerald Ford’s background in the Warren Commission’s corruption of evidence of the JFK assassination,  FBI Chief  Hoover advised Nixon that after the corruption scandal with his first Vice President Spiro Agnew, Gerald Ford would be his best option if his own Presidency would come into danger. With Gerald Ford perhaps being the next President, any secrets of widespread involvement in the JFK murder would be kept secret, including the involvement of the CIA.  If  Gerald Ford would decide to pursue matters further with “Watergate” (both FBI Chief Hoover and Nixon were fully aware of this, the CIA included) it would both expose Gerald Ford himself to his controversial involvement in the Warren Commission, besides this  it would expose Nixon, Hoover, the CIA and the systems of the Executive powers. They all had most positive relations with Gerald Ford, who once said that he had no real enemies. Gerald Ford’s assessment was correct, he had no real enemies as he never caused any real controversy apart from the “Nixon-pardon”.

Indeed, with Gerald Ford in the White House the establishment would be secured that the status quo on the most vital Government secrets would stay the same. It would not be the best reflection on the US and the world if it would prove that the highest government levels for various reasons were involved in this crime. Whilst Gerald Ford had no real enemies, John Fitzgerald Kennedy had a number of enemies as he was quite outspoken on significant issues in the US at the time. The same applies to his younger brother Robert Francis Kennedy.

It never happened before that a US President was assassinated by a miliary related Agency of the US Government with authority from major powers within this government. The reasons for this assassination would be much revealing for the nature and standards of this US Government, hence regardless the implications all efforts being in place to suppress the truth with all possible and available means. Besides this, from one thing other issues may evolve. It never happened either that a Senator from New York being succesful in the run up to Presidential elections, with a good sense of social justice and strong anti-war sentiments, would be assassinated by the same background powers who were in this case responsible for the death of his older brother, – the late 35th US President.

If Watergate would be reopened Howard Hunt’s case would be likely first investigated.  If he would tell everything he knew,  including all the connections he had with people connected to “The Bay of Pig crisis”, the CIA  and others, –  the JFK assassination would likely be far more important then the real Watergate burglary itself.  The RFK assassination could be well involved in this as well.

Gerald Ford was fully aware of the potential implications as he was already a compromised person before he even became Vice President. Whilst in function as US President stating to the public that “The long national nightmare is over” and that “Our Constitution works” he was simply not telling the truth.  The nightmare was not over and other Presidents after John F Kennedy would make matters even worse, in different areas of secrecy being required and cover up’s being considered “normal” now from the perception of various governments

Gerald Ford simply compromised himself  (again actually) to prevent the national nightmare from 1963 and those who were involved to be exposed (through all pending hearings). This was the reason for the Nixon pardon, as “Watergate” would otherwise open “a can of worms”.

Obviously Gerald Ford protected with this the many who were involved, and even perhaps not knowing this Howard Hunt’s life, though the last was not really a priority.  If it would come either to further court or Senate hearings, most likely  Hunt would be assassinated by the CIA beforehand. This happened with a number of witnesses before. The suspicious death of Hunt’s wife was for Hunt himself a warning  not to take matters further. Gerald Ford knew about the danger of Hunt going to speak in court if so required. Hunt knew too much and was far too much involved.

Rather than that it proved the Constitution did work, it proved that the Constitution did not work. It does raise the question on which principles did Gerald Ford publicly show that the Constitution did work. Which principles did he defend?   If some speak about the courage of Gerald Ford when he gave Nixon full pardon, as such preventing that a more evil truth would become public (the evil of a corrupt government system involved in the JFK assassination), the question is then how to define this courage. It does raise the question as well what sort of Constitution did work. Needless to say that this was not the US Constitution, neither was it the Constitution of people seeking more honesty in government policy.

Time after time US Presidents would compromise the same US Constitution and mislead the public on the most significant issues of their time with backdoor dealings neither being justified nor lawful, and Congress being a lame duck, not having the political ability or determination to solve matters for once and for all.

Democracy for the US proved to be a charming Government with neither however too much substance nor integrity among  the few who were able to manipulate the opinions of the many, as part of the authority and the powers they were entrusted  based on the same US Constitution. The last so often being compromised by people trying even to manipulate this Constitution for their own secret endeavours. The way to Justice is long with many obstacles on the road and in US history many of such obstacles neglected, which made that the power of Democracy and the intend of the US Constitution suffered.

James Madison, the 4th US President, would have raised the same concerns if he was able to watch only once more over the ongoing Government corruption.  Ford was part of this, whatever he did good, – he was part of the cover up in the JFK assassination. Part of the cover up to protect Nixon to leave the past to the past. President Ford’s own press secretary resigned after his “Nixon – pardon”.

People in the US who fled to Canada to avoid fighting in  the Vietnam war as an act of conscious were either prosecuted or only got a conditional pardon. People with little or no conscious in the JFK assassination walked free, as much as possible protected. Witnessed were killed, evidence was disrupted and compromised. Prosecution was prevented by the highest officials in Government even 10 years after the JFK assassination. Ford was part of this from the beginning.   He knew it was a Coupe d’Etat and he knew who were behind it and as US President he could have made a different choice at the beginning of his Presidency, but he could not do it as too many others were involved and he did not know what it would do to the future in general, and his future as well.

Gerald Ford  did promote Donald Rumsfeld (to be discussed later again) to help him to set the priorities for his Presidential direction. Rumsfeld became the President’s right hand. If we look at history how matters evolved with Rumsfeld even coming up again in the last Bush Administration, and in various Republican Administrations before, – this choice  was not the best choice. However Gerald Ford could perhaps not know this at the time. Henry Kissinger stayed on in Ford’s foreign policy team and they worked in good coöperation.

Donald Kendell , President of Pepsi – Cola, was considered to be “the eyes and ears” of the CIA in Cuba. The day before the JFK assassination he was meeting with Nixon. The Watergate burglars were tied up with both the Kennedy assassination and the Bay of Pigs. At least one of the Watergate burglars was on the CIA payroll on the 17th of June 1972 (Eugenio Martinez). The other Watergate conspirators included ex- FBI agent G. Gordon Liddy, ex – CIA agents james McCord and E. Howard Hunt, Bernard Barker, Frank Sturgis and Virggilo Gonzales. Hunt being deeply involved in the Bay of Pigs operations retired later from the CIA . Ford knew this. He became even the Covert Operations Chief for President Nixon.  Several reports do show that Hunt was in Dallas on the 22nd of November 1963 when JFK was assassinated. Marita Lorenz testified under oath that she observed him paying off an assassination team in Dallas the night before the JFK murder.

Obviously Nixon was most concerned  when Hunt’s involvement with Watergate (with the others)  would came to light, with the previous connections he had. Nixon’s aide John Ehrlichman was instructed by Nixon to order the acting FBI Director to remove 6 written files from Hunt’s personal safe. Gray did as he was told and burnt those files in his fireplace. He took the brunt for it and had to resign, which reflects how well the buffer systems in the White House do work as the issue was not further investigated.  John Dean, council to the President,  shredded Hunt’s operational diary.  The latest Nixon tapes are studded with deletions, especially discussions about Hunt, the Bay of Pigs and JFK.  In May 1972 Nixon disclosed on tape to his 2 top aides that the Warren Commission was “the greatest hoax that has ever been perpetuated.”    Vice-President Ford was fully aware at the time as both he and Nixon had various background information on the JFK assassination.   Hunt later did admit on CIA involvement in the JFK assassination and he fingered CIA officers Cord Meyer, David Phillips, William Harvey and David Morales.

Like former US President Eisenhower and Truman warned for the military establishment, – Kennedy after the Bay of Pigs crisis did do the same. He did treat them with courtesy and respect, but he was extremely on his guard as he realised that those “groups” had their own strong agenda, not refraining from misleading a US President if it would suit this agenda. No US President in the US since JFK took those lessons seriously on board. No legislative powers even in the US took this seriously on board as if they would have done so the previous Administration would have been impeached over the 9/11 drama’s.

A  US President needs to be strong enough to rule both the CIA and the Pentagon. Most Presidents after JFK were too much compromised themselves already that rather ruling those Agencies, they became more or less puppets and allowed the Agencies to engage in activities out of all normal proportions. The last without investigations in retrospect as they were somehow able to keep Congress out of the picture.

As reflected in part in chapter 4 of these series, in retrospect there is evidence that Nixon originated the Cuban (Bay of Pigs) invasion under Eisenhower, hence his close links with those people who felt betrayed by JFK as part of JFK’s refusal not to back up this invasion with further military support from the air (once Kennedy discovered that CIA information was not correct at the time). Hence as well Nixon’s close links with both this people and the CIA,  including both LBJ and including his old friend: the notorious FBI Chief Hoover.

Obviously there is far more to both the lives of Nixon and Ford during their Presidencies and afterwards, but also before they became US President.   Whilst Nixon was at times very unpredictable, Ford was fairly balanced and actually quite pleasant. Despite not winning the elections in 1974 he took over the Presidency of Richard Nixon at a turbulent time and there have been much positives as well.

If you ask me whether he was a good man, I don’t hesitate to think that Gerald Ford had a better character than Richard Nixon or Johnson.  People make failures in their lives, and so be it.  The measure of this man is larger than what he did wrong or tried to hide, but if the question is whether he did violate justice at the time (or violate the US Constitution), the answer is 100% in the affirmative: yes, he did!

It can’t be denied that this was a touchstone of  Gerald Ford’s character at the time and that this was not the courage which is prepared to lose everything for higher values and principles being at stake. What was at stake was that the principle of truth was neither allowed nor permitted to show the darkest episode in US political and Constitutional history, and Gerald Ford correctly stated that if Lincoln was alive in those days, he would turn in his grave. He correctly stated on another occasion that he was “not a Lincoln but a Ford.” In other words he was the man who avoided in the most critical time of decision making the moral obligation to stick to the truth and the US Constitution. What could not have been expected anymore from former President L.B. Johnson or Richard M. Nixon has they passed already long before the “point of no return” could have within reach of Gerald Ford.  He may have had his reasons, but it was neither an act of courage nor a special service to his country that he acted the way he did in his full Presidential Pardon of Richard Milhous Nixon.

In his memoirs being published just before he died Gerald Ford did admit finally that the CIA was involved in the JFK assassination. Ford may have been however the man who did regret his involvement in the Warren Commission in the way he did,  and in his case I do not rule out that this burden from the past was indeed a personal burden for him later in life after his Presidency was finished.  However he did not hesitate to accept the “Profile in Courage Award”  in 2001 at the JFK library in Boston, which in a way is ironic in retrospect.  The examples however of courage as described in JFK’s book “Profiles in courage” are of an entirely  different nature than reflected in either LBJ’ s, Nixon’s or Gerald Ford’s life.

Could Gerald Ford have dealt with the matter differently?

Let’s be honest, obviously he was not in the easiest place. It is a matter of choice , character and courage to do so and indeed with his Presidential pardon for Nixon he obstructed justice systems to work as they should do in the US. It would have been a major issue in the US if the Watergate scandal would have revealed the further background and links as being described, but it would have solved the matter for once and for all and if fully investigated (the JFK, RFK and MLK assassinations included).  With some of the links to Bush senior on  the JFK assassination, there would have been likely neither a W.H. Bush Administration nor a G.W. Bush Administration as the principles of governance being implemented by Congress would have prevented those people to be elected US President, – besides new legislation for  the other “operating powers” in the US.  The forces for justice did prove neither to be that strong in the US during the years of Gerald Ford in the White House, nor during the Presidential years after President Carter.

Fact is that the CIA has been involved in high-profile assassinations on US citizens and this created a precedent for the powers at the background to change history against the will of the voters and against the intent of the Constitution. Still applies in 2011 that those powers need to be restricted if Congress is ready to deal with this, based on historical review of events.

Generally spoken no justice provided within any Presidential Administration in whatever effort  justifies  to hide  any of the criminal injustice of past Administrations at the level as this occurred, with the secrecy and cover up’s from LBJ  until today. If the problem would have been properly tackled and resolved at the time – with still the option today it would have meant progress for the US.  Once such dark secrets are allowed to be kept secret in Government systems it creates a precedent for even worse things to be kept secret if secrecy for illegal activities becomes part of “normal procedure” of Government activities. It would  seem in the US that when such bad things happen they are put in the freezer of history and classified documents, and secret files are allowed to be opened some 20 to 100 years later, depending how serious the matter was. This is not the way the US will grow as both a Republic and a Democracy!

The real issue is that once gross injustice is allowed to be part of government systems, greater evil will be even allowed to be applied when it suits the Government to find an excuse to go to war, even if the reasons for going to war are fabricated.

Again, WTC 7  full of CIA intelligence and most confidential papers went down during 9/11 as a result of a controlled demolition as reflected by Ted Gunderson (former FBI Chief) and Albert Stubblebine (former Major General of all Military Intelligence). Since the JFK assassination evil systems existing and operating within the Executive branch were allowed to continue its work against the interest of US citizens.

It was President Lincoln (a Republican) who warned for allowing the President to go at war for pleasure, however most of the Republican Presidents the last 40 years have been at war as most of those US Presidents had very close links with the CIA , and other organisations not serving the real interests of the US and the world. Obviously people may view this differently but the crux is that if the books would be really opened on the past Bush Administration, and the real facts came to table, including the role of Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney, – and if  let’s say 9/11 was really allowed to have a full independent investigation without the usual obstructions and tampering  of past investigations and evidence not even reaching the table, it would be a mind-blowing event for all those investigators being involved.    Not to speak of all the US citizens if they would get an insight on issues which formed the base why this former US President and Rumsfeld and Cheney would potentially go to jail in both Germany and Switzerland if they would visit those countries The situation is of such nature that based on the relatively little information being available,  the former US President Bush  is already unable to travel to Switzerland without a potential arrest warrant. US citizens may get angry about the fact that a little country in Europe may convict the former US President and put him in a likely well deserved jail if he would go on holiday there,  – but let’s be realistic in terms of justice. Does this not tell at least something about the past Administration, being allowed by both the public and Congress to continue to do “the job”? We’ll discuss this later.

The US is nearly bankrupt now, bankrupt of what it robbed from the US itself.

Generally spoken former President Gerald  Ford despite his failures to overcome the injustice from the past ,  did not engage in a new war. He had a stable and pleasant personality and perhaps he has been worried that too much compromising events hitting daylight in the US at once would neither be well swallowed nor well digested. However the events around Bush Cheney and Rumsfeld in all detail being  lined up in the scrutiny of justice would be for certain badly swallowed and badly digested as well. And they are all interlinked because the Legislative US Powers did not use its full recourses to regulate the Executive Powers by law and proper law enforcement.

Gerald Ford was restricted by the past by choice. He did not need to do so. He was otherwise a good President, but he would have been a great President if he would have faced this past with dignity and courage, faced this past with the required determination to make sure that “Lincoln would not turn over in his grave” by seeing what happened and what was unresolved, allowing eventually a system of  government to help US Presidents going to war  – as President Lincoln once said – “For pleasure!”

Significant at President’s Ford credit is that after the findings of the Senate requested Church Committee, he issued Executive order 11905 with guidance and restrictions for various agencies including the clarification of both intelligence authorities and responsibilities. The later President Bush was nominated to be CIA Director (with strong opposition from Senator Frank Church) and got the job to give the CIA a better reputation. He was given 90 days to carry out Executive order 11905, which included a reorganisation and a statement that CIA activities would not be directed against American citizens. The Church Committee investigations included the question whether the CIA was involved in the assassination of domestic officials, including President Kennedy. Those dynamics were positive, but interesting as well for various reasons. President Ford did know of H.W.Bush association with the CIA at the time of the JFK assassination. It seemed a very political partisan choice to select H.W. Bush for this position.

For further insight in Gerald Ford’s Presidency see the recommended links

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8rg9c4pUrg&feature=player_detailpage                                           (Ford – Carter debate excerpt)

Jimmy Carter took over from Gerald Ford in 1977 as the 39th President of the United States. The Watergate scandal was still fresh in the voters mind.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzgB_w1tO5M&feature=player_detailpage                                    (President Ford died – ABC News)

Will be continued>>>>see Part 6

–

Thank you!

–

 Paul 

–
Paul Alexander Wolf

–

https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2013/01/06/we-dream-of-things-that-never-were-and-say-why-not/

–

Profiles In US Presidential Violations of Justice – Front page (Part 1 of 11) on July 5, 2011

Related articles

• The steady hand of Gerald Ford (jsonline.com)
• Warren Commission Report: High Level Coverup Of JFK Assassination? (rinf.com)
• SIX JFK SHOOTERS, THREE TIED TO CIA, NAMED – Oswald not among them (veteranstoday.com)
• Report on the Warren Commission (cheapbestessaywriting.wordpress.com)
• SIX JFK SHOOTERS, THREE TIED TO CIA, NAMED – Oswald not among them (stateofglobe.com)
• Hillary Clinton Fired For Lies, Unethical Behavior (tomohalloran.com)
• Roger Stone: Lbj Killed Jfk (shark-tank.net)
• JFK’s court was no Camelot (christiantoday.com)
• Military Law Expert: Obama Should Pardon Snowden (ritholtz.com)
• Turley: Why Barack Obama should pardon Edward Snowden (newsday.com)

US Presidential profiles in violations of Justice (Part 4 – former President Nixon)

English: US President Richard Nixon and Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai toast, February 25, 1972 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The 37th US President

Richard Milhouse Nixon

“I am not a crook” – R.M Nixon:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh163n1lJ4M&feature=player_detailpage

RICHARD   NIXON’s   VIOLATIONS  OF 

JUSTICE

Richard Milhouse Nixon (1913-1994 was born in Yorba Linda (California) in a lower middle class quaker family of an Irish background. After his degree at Duke University he worked for 5 years as a lawyer and served in the US Navy from 1942 until 1946.

He became a Republican member of US Congress in California by 1946. Whilst campaigning he pictured his democratic opponent as communist sympathiser. His tactical abilities allowed him to make a quick rise in political circles and he was an important member of the House  Committee on “Un American Activities” whilst worker on the Elgar Hiss case. In his early Congressional years he was assisted by various people, including Jack Ruby ( as far as Department of Justice memo)

He became Vice – President under Dwight D  Eisenhower when Eisenhower did win the elections in 1952. As Vice President he was known for his outspoken exchanges with Nikita Khrushchev during a visit to Moscow in 1959. He lost the presidential elections very narrowly from John Fitzgerald Kennedy in 1960. He lost then in 1962 the elections in California for the Governor position of this State.

Thereafter he became a succesful Wall Street lawyer. About 1967  he decided for an extensive tour around the world, visiting both Europe, the Middle East, Vietnam, Africa and Latin America. Whist reportedly undecided to run for the Presidential elections in 1968 he published an article called “Asia After Viet Nam” in the “Foreign Affairs  Journal” reflecting on his policy of removing American combat troops from Vietnam. In this article he projected his potential Administration opening a way to China as well.  Once decided to run for the Presidency in 1968, he mentioned in the 1968 campaign that he had a secret plan  for a complete withdrawal from Vietnam. He returned to win the Presidential elections in 1968 with only a small margin benefitting in retrospect strongly from the assassination of his potential Democratic opponent Robert F Kennedy in June 1968. The unrest on top of this at the Democratic Convention in Chicago with police forces crushing anti Vietnam war protestors created on national TV a picture of unrest in the US and Nixon promised to change this situation. The US in 1968 was a country with strong divisions with strong opposition against the war in Vietnam and by far the majority of US citizens wanted to stop this war. Martin Luther King, jr was assassinated on the 4th of April 1968. He was a prominent leader in the African-American Civil Rights movement and representing as well a growing opposition against the war in Vietnam. The New York Senator Robert Kennedy has been for months agonising on the question whether he should oppose both President Johnson and the war, but the growing and escalating violence decided him to run eventually for the Presidency at a relatively late stage, – however gaining increasing support from both the movement of social justice and those who were against the war. A large number of African Americans trusted him as because he seemed genuinely compassionate about the still existing social injustice in the US. There were however powerful groups in the US who did not want a second Kennedy in the White House and both the assassination on MLK and RFK caused the anti-war movement losing its strongest leaders. This needs to be discussed in some detail as it will show some of the forceful background dynamics pushing all in the same direction. Within this context the main obstacles for Richard Nixon’s election were resolved as the strength of the movement against both the war and for more social justice was  reduced within a climate of unrest, which was  obvious  after 2 vital assassinations in a row and the war in Vietnam still going on.  Many years later Coretta Scot King (MLK’s wife) did win a wrongful death civil trial against Loyd Jowers and other unknown co-conspirators in 1999.  Jowers received $100000,- to arrange the assassination on MLK and the Jury was convinced that Government Agencies were parties to the assassination plot. It would seem that the LBJ government was involved at setting the stage of this assassination, using James Earl Ray as a scapegoat, as publicly on TV confirmed by Jowers on ABC’ Prime Time Life.  Jowers stated that both the mafia and the US Government were involved in the MLK assassination.  Reportedly Memphis police officer Lieutenant Earl Clark fired the fatal shots. The conspiracy did include J Edgar Hoover, Richard helms, the CIA, the Memphis Police Department(MPD), Army intelligence and organised crime.  A very key person within the civil right movement was on the government payroll, responsible for infiltration and sabotage. Readers may wonder about the evidence of this revelation but this evidence was uncovered and put before a Jury in Memphis,TN, in November 1999. Seventy witnesses testified under oath with 4000 pages of evidence, much of it was it new. The news of one of the most national security trials was suppressed, as  tends to happen in the US at times. It was clear that the 1997 reports of the House Select Committee on Assassinations re James Earl Ray justified verdict were wrong: he was not the one who murdered MLK!

All parties involved did not take any chance. It was agreed that MLK would not leave Memphis alive and at the time of his assassination he was under complete surveillance with various guns loaded in his direction if the attempt from one party would fail. Like the JFK assassination, but different, it was an ambush. MLK was not only a Civil Rights activist, he was even far more than a voice against the war in Vietnam, hence authorities decided to take him out of the picture. Regarding the RFK assassination there is no doubt that Sirhan Bishara Sirhan fired a gun but it did not cause the death of RFK. Multiple shooters were in the small area were RFK’ assassination took place. At least 9 shots have been fired at the end of the night Kennedy did win the primaries in Los Angeles at the Ambassador Hotel. The LAPD destroyed key physical and photographic evidence and eyewitness testimony. LA County Coroner and Chief Medical Examiner Dr Thomas T Noguchi prepared the autopsy report on RFK where the headshot damage not only reflected a pathologic impossibility, but it ruled out as well Sirhan’s gun as the offending weapon in RFK’s death. Sirhan is still in jail, being convicted of first degree murder.

Video images identified 3 former CIA agents were very close to RFK at the time of his assassination (Morales,Joannides and Campbell). David Morales was the Chief Operations at JM-Wave, training Cuban exiles in 1963 in covert actions against Fidel Castro. Morales and Campbell have talked with each other in the in the hotel lobby prior to the assassination (witness report David Rabern). Campbell has been reportedly  in and around various  police stations in the 2 months before  the RFK  assassination. Joannides has been the Chief of Psychological Warfare Operations at JM -Wave. He had retired from his CIA position but returned back to active duty in 1978 as the liaison between the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA).  Not sure who nominated him in this position but obviously Joannides failed to tell the HSCA that he ever worked at JM-Wave, as such maintain his covert identity and compromising the entire Congressional investigations. It was Joannides obstructing the HSCA to get access to vital information (crucial documents) about the JFK assassination during the re-investigations on the assassinations of JFK and MLK. The lead investigator of the HSCA Gaeton Fonzi concluded that  Morales was directly involved in the JFK assassination as due to revenge of the Bay of Pigs.

Before we start on former US President Richard Nixon note that Richard Nixon and George Herbert Bush (the later US Vice-President and US President) have been integral to the Bay of Pigs operations.  As Vice-President, Nixon worked under President Eisenhower, together with Allen Dulles from the CIA and other senior CIA staff on the strategic planning of the Bay of Pigs. The bestselling book “Plausible Denial” by Mark Lane in 1991 reflects on both CIA involvement in JFK’s death. The later President Bush  was at the time of the Pay of Pigs a CIA  operative and the FBI confirmed in documents being released many years later that Bush sr was involved in the CIA briefing the day after the JFK assassination.The role of FBI Chief Hoover in the JFK assassination is most controversial as well. Gerald Ford as member of the Warren Commission leaked all confidential information to FBI Chief Hoover. Without claiming to be correct in all details the general picture of key CIA people being involved in both the JFK and RFK assassination with Bay of Pigs links, Richard Nixon a close friend of Hoover with Bay of Pigs links, Herbert Hoover a profound RFK hater, major CIA background powers in favour of the Vietnam war etc etc give the background why RFK was killed in 1968 and how  Hoover’s extra police actions in Chicago after 2 vital assassinations in a row did prepare the road for Nixon to get elected. Nothing is foolproof in life and in theory Hubert Humphrey could have won the 1968 elections but he was too closely associated with Lyndon Johnson who was most unpopular. Besides this LBJ warned Hubert Humphrey that if he would publicly oppose the Administration’s Vietnam war policy he personally would destroy Humphrey’s chances to get the Democratic nomination. Not much luck for Humphrey with such a boss and such mighty coöperation with FBI Chief Hoover. It was in both LBJ’s interest and Hoovers interest that all government secrets would stay secret and from this point of view with LBJ’s background knowledge about Nixon and Gerald Ford  -(fully shared with FBI Chief Hoover)- ,..Richard Nixon would be the best choice to remain the status quo on secrecy and the war in Vietnam as being supported by the CIA.   With both MLK and RFK out of the way the strong anti Vietnam war movement was at least for some part broken as part of a Government conspiracy similar as happened in 1963 with JFK.   Most of the same key players were still in power.

With opposing LBJ about the war in Vietnam and running for the Presidency in 1968 Robert F Kennedy did sign his own death sentence, like MLK did when he spoke out against the war in Vietnam with so much people following him, like JFK did when he opposed the CIA and the Pentagon Generals when he despised their advise at times and decided to withdraw from Vietnam. No one can oppose the real background powers in the US, not even President Obama. This is America ladies and gentlemen, this was America and in a way it still is America. In the 1960ties there have been criminals in US Government systems neither allowing justice nor allowing peace in Vietnam at a stage this was desired. They robbed the Nation of people who perhaps not being perfect tried to do what was good in a particular time in history and the tool of the government was simply assassination and make the way free for people who would serve the needs for the American military establishment in the White house, rather than the need of the voters, – the parents who had to let their children go to Vietnam and had to receive the medals of honour when they died courageously in pointless war dictated by a corrupted government policy guided by the war heads of the Pentagon from which both Eisenhower and Truman said that their powers were far out of proportion. The US seemed to be a Republic with a Democratic image, but the real government was not a government from the people and for the people. It did not serve the people. It played the media. And when opposing powers were too strong,  when the forces towards more justice developed with fierce and without fear, it became overruled and crushed by both the police and the military. Such things do happen in countries who at least are honest enough not to claim they are a democracy. The many dirty wars of the US are not a reflection of real democracies based on the values of those who prepared the US Constitution. It is this Constitution which needs to be protected to get a better Union. Not a Union only being able to survive with assassinations of those who give to the moral values and justice within this Union.

Obviously Nixon did promise the public a secret way out of Vietnam, whilst in secret preparing for the opposite if he was elected. By adding to the general feel of unrest in Chicago FBI Chief Hoover added in a strategic way to the chances of victory for Richard Nixon.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pf22x5r16Zo&feature=player_detailpage                                                                                                                                  (The Pentagon Papers: A Primer for Top Secrets…..)

Once President Nixon nominated his campaign Director Bob Haldeman White House Chief of Staff,  foreign policy decisions were made in close coöperation with Henry Kissinger. interestingly Secretary of State William Rogers was by far not always prior aware about some of the Administrations enterprises. Speechwriter for Richard Nixon Ray Price reflected on “the light side” and “the dark side” of Richard Nixon. He was however reelected in 1972 with a large majority. His Administration from 1974 sustained remarkable controversy over the Vietnam war. The invasion in 1970 of Cambodia and his approval of heavy bombardments on North Vietnam took his toll in the public opinion and he signed in 1973 a cease-fire.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhtsSu9hgxI&feature=player_detailpage                                                                                                                      (Evidence of Revision: Part 4  -1 of 11)

A strategic arms limitation treaty with the Soviet Union was signed during his Administration and he was the first President to reopen US relations with China in 1972. The Watergate burglary as will be detailed later brought his Presidency totally down.  Being the first US President to resign from office he avoided as such impeachment. The new President Gerald Ford gave him a full pardon in in 1974.

It would seem Nixon’s staff frequently conspired to keep the “darker side” of Nixon – as Ray Price reflected on – in check and obviously Nixon himself was involved in this. As it proved however, Nixon participated in some conspiracies with high level support outside the White House.

On the 3rd of November 1969 Nixon declared that his Administration would not give in to the demands of anti-war demonstrators, sympathising with “The great silent majority of Americans” to back him up in his efforts for a “just and lasting peace”.  Nixon knew how to play the game of politics by doing what “the doves wanted” but meanwhile seeking ready coöperation with both the CIA and the Pentagon.  In April 1970 Nixon ordered extra American troops into Cambodia. During a nation-wide student protest 4 students were killed by the National Guard at Ohio Kent State University. Nixon backed down a bit at the 1970 midterm elections preparing as well against the balanced and dignified Democratic senator Edmund Muskie from Maine, who wanted to run for the 1972 elections. Nixon’s state visit to China did raise his popularity. He signed 3 months later as well a treaty with the Soviet Union restricting from both sides establishing anti ballistic missile systems apart from limiting offensive missile launchers. Meanwhile however Nixon had responded already in the second part of 1971 to the publication of the Johnson Administration’s classified “Pentagon Papers”. This publication was unauthorised and provided an insight in the origins of the Vietnam war. Nixon assigned a group to prevent leaks of classified information and harassed perceived enemies of his Administration. FBI Chief Hoover proved to be very helpful with this. Some weeks after Nixon returned from the Soviet Union, four men were arrested at the Watergate complex as due to burglary into the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee. After his reelection in 1972 the Watergate burglars were convicted and several of them implicated Nixon’s closest associates. It proved that the Watergate-break-in was only one of the several acts of both sabotage and political espionage carried out by the Nixon Administration. Nixon tried to keep away secret tapes from hearings by the “principal of separation of powers”. He had however to provide many of the required tapes but not everything. The unravelling of the Nixon Presidency was unstoppable now and in 1974 the “House Judiciary Committee”started to discuss Nixon’s impeachment. It proved that Nixon had engaged in extensive domestic wiretapping apart from his questionable tax deductions through which he paid almost no federal income tax in 1973. On the 24th of July 1974 the Supreme Court ordered Nixon to give the tapes he had withheld. Those tapes were supposed to contain evidence of Nixon’s personal involvement in the Watergate operations including reflections about Watergate burglars being engaged in CIA operations.  The verdict was that if he would not leave office on his own decision, he would be impeached, convicted and removed from office. On the 8th of August 1974 Nixon announced his resignation and Vice-President Ford was administered the Presidential oath on the 9th of August.

Richard Milhous Nixon, the 37th President of the United States of America was supported by powerful circles in Washington when he was elected President in 1968. The US was unsettled as due to social unrest, in part due to the Vietnam war and in part as a result of the aftermath following  2 assassinations of  perhaps both the most prominent political figures (MLK and RFK) representing the movement of  social change and justice , – including the end of the war in Vietnam. I repeat this once more to put some matters in perspective.

President Johnson voiced private concerns in 1964 that Vietnam would become a second Korea but he was already so much compromised by his own past, including CIA and FBI collaborations, not being able to take a different course of action. Hence he did not go for a second term. However again, he warned his Vice-President Hubert Humphrey not to turn against the Vietnam war as otherwise his chances on the Democratic nomination would be destroyed. In a way LBJ did aid in the process to get Nixon elected.

Both the Pentagon and the CIA have the perception that Presidents come and go and as long as the military interests of the US are not compromised, they take no obvious interest who has the reigns in the White House, as long long term interest are not at stake. Those long term interests are fairly restricted to the military US interests.  Needless to say that those views may clash with the Presidential powers in the White House. Prominent people in US politics may be succesful to be elected Commander in Chief with profoundly different views on the strategic views of the US in the future, in which case  “national security” will be considered. This is the reason that both JFK and RFK became the victim of assassination plots to make the way free for persons who were able to coöperate more with those background powers.

The strategic powers of both those Government Agencies are very strong and do own all the means to drive their points in ways the public has no knowledge of. This does not mean that all people working for either CIA or Pentagon are wrong. Most of them are highly regarded professionals with both courage and integrity, however both Organisations are that large that some people at the wrong time in certain positions can make significant differences to the culture by which those Agencies work. This culture does not change overnight  with a new Chief or Director, if the previous one had a controversial impact.. The right US President at the time can make a huge difference with nominating people with high credentials in those positions, – however the wrong President at a certain time can make from this point of view devastating failures with implications beyond imagination. It clearly makes the system of US Governance not fool-proof, as corruption may as such develop at the highest levels of US powers,- whilst both Congress and the public are kept in the dark. Richard Nixon was one of those Presidents, allowing collaboration with those forces who have neither much conscious nor morality. Strict regulation and control of those powers is required as a national security interest which favours the many in the US, and not only a few in Washington. The reflections in retrospect of some insiders of both FBI and Military establishment including the CIA do speak in clear terms about involvement in terrible actions throughout decades, neither controlled by the President nor with insight from Congress.  The Eisenhower administration warned already for the excessive powers of both the CIA and the Pentagon and it has been clear what those powers are able to inflict if opposed by powerful different views, but also what they are able to inflict to regain control via the persons being elected US President.

Coming back on what has been stated before: it proved that Nixon had engaged in extensive domestic wiretapping, apart from questionable tax deductions through which he paid almost no federal income tax at all in 1973. On the 24th of July 1974 the supreme Court ordered Nixon to give the tapes he had withheld. Those tapes were supposed to contain evidence of Nixon’s personal involvement in the Watergate operations, including reflections about Watergate burglars being engaged in CIA operations. The verdict was that if he did not leave the White House on his own decision, he would be impeached, convicted and removed from office. On the 8th of August 1974 Nixon announced his resignation and Vice President Gerald Ford took over as US President on the 9th of August. Only 1 month in his Presidency, Ford pardoned Richard Nixon completely, avoiding as such further investigations in the Watergate burglary as this would have far more implications than the public knows. Gerald Ford has been part of the Warren Commission with the task to investigate the JFK assassination. Gerald Ford “the CIA man in Congress” had very close links with Allen Dulles, ex CIA Director who was sacked by John F Kennedy.   Gerald Ford had close links with Nixon, in part as he became his Vice-President at a time when there was the potential that Richard Nixon could run in trouble over Watergate. This all happened when FBI Chief Hoover was still alive. Obviously we know that Spiro Agnew had to resign but his succession was for strategic reasons vital. Gerald Ford was a very close with FBI Chief Hoover as well. This Presidential Pardon for Nixon will be discussed in the next chapter

The question as whether President Nixon did contribute to the country needs to be answered in the affirmative. As a person and a President he appeared to have major flaws. As will be revealed later he was compromised already before entering the White House. After the JFK assassination he was the second US President (we will discus this later) who should have been convicted after a full further Watergate investigation.  Nixon had a very  strong personal ambition and drive, by nature he was often unpredictable and at times leaning on his staff.

Did he violate justice at the time of his Presidency and before? The answer is yes.  He deserved to be impeached and sadly the Watergate scandal was never further investigated as it would have revealed a more darker side of Nixon than we know.

Strictly spoken by any moral standards he was not suitable for the US Presidency and in terms of timing we can be glad in retrospect that he was not the “Commander-in-Chief” during the Cuban missile crisis. The world would not have existed anymore as he would have done what Allan Dulles presented him. Cuba would have been attacked and the Russian Commanders would have ordered to fire installed nuclear missiles back to the major cities in the US.

Let’s say that history has been mild from this point of view, but history has been relentless in terms of corrupting powers at the United States government.People may have skill and talent, but if they have a lack of conscious justice gets violated and things go wrong. Error’s are always possible. Genuine people make them but they are genuine to admit them and correct them. The problem with Nixon was that he was not very genuine. It was somewhat wishful thinking perhaps when he said: “I am not a crook!”

Lets face it, the US as a country of generally genuine people is far more than the sum of the failures and corruptions of past Governments, but neither the past nor the future can take away the criminal actions which took place and processes need to be in place that this will never ever happen anymore as the US needs to raise above the standards from the past!

Will be continued>>>>>>in Part 3

–

Thank you!

–

 Paul 

–
Paul Alexander Wolf

–

https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2013/01/06/we-dream-of-things-that-never-were-and-say-why-not/

–

Profiles In US Presidential Violations of Justice – Front page (Part 1 of 11) on July 5, 2011

Related articles

• RFK killer moved to new prison on anniversary of JFK assassination (theguardian.com)
• RFK – Bloodline Assassins (2013 Full Documentary) (wchildblog.com)
• RFK’s killer moved to different prison on anniversary of JFK assassination (examiner.com)
• RFK killer Sirhan Sirhan moved to another prison – on anniversary of JFK assassination (oddonion.com)
• RFK killer Sirhan Sirhan moved to another prison — on anniversary of JFK assassination (usnews.nbcnews.com)
• RFK’s Killer, Sirhan Sirhan, Moved To San Diego Prison On Anniversary Of JFK’s Assassination (losangeles.cbslocal.com)
• JFK, RFK And MLK Were All Killed By The Same Forces (thesleuthjournal.com)
• Richard Nixon, Setting A Post-Presidential Example (nixonfoundation.org)
• Sirhan Sirhan, RFK’s assassin, moved to San Diego County prison (fox5sandiego.com)
• JFK, RFK, & MLK Were All Killed By the Same Forces (republicbroadcasting.org)

US Presidential profiles in violations of Justice (Part 3 – former US President Johnson)

Lyndon B. Johnson taking the oath of office on Air Force One following the assassination of John F. Kennedy, Dallas, Texas, November 22, 1963 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The 36th US President

Lyndon B.Johnson

–

“I am making a collection of the things my opponents have found me to be, and when this election is over I am going to open a museum and put them on display”  -LBJ.

Introduction

Perhaps Lyndon Baines Johnson neither needs a museum to put his assumed actions by his opponents  on display, nor does he need the archives and classified documents to support his actions, – as history will deal with this eventually when at about 2029 any of the secret documents not being destroyed over time, will be disclosed to the public.

His Presidency marked a change history would take, neither by choice of the public, nor by justice assumed to be operating in the systems of US government. His Presidency and the entire Executive branch at his time is still surrounded in some mystery.

Many historians tried to describe both the man and his years in public office, and all have been succesful in giving some details of this man in action, smart and bright in his background dealings, charming at times in private conversations, – but at the same time a man to be dealt with with caution. Lyndon Johnson would not shy away from any operation if the last would save his public career.

Whilst discussing LBJ, the question might be raised how far a person is prepared to go to compromise justice if so required, to save his personal and public reputation against any wrong doings in the past. Obviously the last depends on what happened in this past.

From any person to become US President it might be assumed that apart from the drive to power there are generally spoken good intentions to contribute to the country. Once being faced with the responsibility of the US Presidency the perception of people in this role do change in line with the requirements of this role and the broader responsibilities, – extending by far the responsibilities of being a US Senator or Governor. Still  the element of choice is around to compromise yourself based on  wrong advise, compromise yourself as result of the history you have (of perhaps being compromised already) and people being prepared to help you at the highest level as long as you know “you owe them” as well.  The scenario’s are always complex, different as well,  for each US President. Some US Presidents have been in a position never ever being compromised in the past, entering from this point of view with a clear conscience in the White House. They had nothing (“terrible”) to hide, don’t need the favours from FBI and others to protect their past from becoming public knowledge. Speaking in the present, they don’t need to “pay back” with certain favours and deals never to be made public. Strictly spoken this is the best position as when you are principal centred you can’t go much wrong, despite genuine errors and mistakes perhaps. However if this is not the case and you are already compromised before entering the White House, the level of dependence on those who are prepared to protect your history from becoming public knowledge (within the same systems of the Executive branch) are not without risk. Some may compromise themselves even further in those complex scenario’s where conscience is slowly losing control of the actions being required, even at the highest level of public office in the US.  “Review of the JFK assassination 2011″ in the June 2011 edition of this blog gives an extensive picture of the level of criminal corruption at the Executive branch of the United States of America when Johnson took over from John Fitzgerald Kennedy, the 35th US President.

As will be illustrated on LBJ – power can be dangerous, especially if the systems of governance at times are allowed to work outside the domain of the law without being detected at the same time by the systems who are supposed to protect the law, and the integrity of public office. At times it proved that all those systems suffered from widespread criminal infestation never as such being acknowledged by the US from historic point of view.

At the end of the day it all depends on the people operating those systems at the Executive branch, however it depends as well on the people operating  the Legislative branch within the US, as both the House and the US Senate have much powers. However they proved not always to work with the public interest at heart as due to dominating powers at the background compromising this public interest.

In the above spirit US Presidents from LBJ until the latest Bush Administration will be discussed, not as an attack on the American system of government, but as a concern that the systems of governance (the physical exercise of managing both power and policy in the US) has been so weak for decades in the democratic republic of the US. It is a reflection of a deep-rooted unresolved problem where it seems that the Union of the US as a concept has neither been perfect nor optimal. The last however is a minimum requirement.

People who were or became US President did live in the White House at a certain time in history, had to face certain pre-existing dynamics and most of the time they tried to deal with this as good as possible within the given circumstances. They could make a personal choice to grow in those circumstances and leave a legacy despite some violations of justice. As an US President it is almost impossible to make always the best possible decision at any given possible time, as much is dependent on the perception and advise being created within both cabinet, advisers and Agencies. However where justice get compromised still there is the personal choice to make it better or worse, to make it better or bitter.

It is the dilemma we all face as people, however within the position of the highest executive powers this requires the wisdom to be aware that once’s actions may decide the lives and wellbeing of many others. It can make a Nation grow or break on its fundamentals, its future. It can make a Nation develop in surplus or deficit, both morally and financially.

Within this context we start with Lyndon Baines Johnson, or LBJ as he was often called.

LBJ

Lyndon Johnson (1908-1973) was born close to Stonewall in Texas and his family with a Baptist background was quite involved in State’s politics. He worked as a high school teacher and after the Japanese attack on “Pearl Harbour” he joined straight away the US Navy.

He was a “New Deal” Democrat representative in 1937 before actually joining the Navy during the war. In 1948 he did win the race to be the Democratic senator for Texas and under the Presidency of John F Kennedy he served as Vice President. LBJ has been the majority leader in the Senate since 1955 and after the JFK assassination on the 22nd of November 1963 in Dallas (Texas) , he became the new US President without having initially an electoral mandate. With a huge majority he was elected in the US Presidential elections of 1964 and managed without much resistance to pass the Civil Rights Act through Congress in 1964. This bill was largely prepared already by JFK the previous year, not popular at the time. The battle for civil rights as we know has been a long one and significant incidents during the Kennedy Administration prepared the Kennedy team for the required legislative changes to pass Congress once reelected, but history took a different course of action..

Once elected with such majority of voters Johnson with the complete backing of the US military powers, ordered in 1965  the Airmobile Division and forces of the CIA to go to Vietnam to increase the US fighting strength, followed by an increase in military fighting strength from 75000 to 125000 man on the ground. This evolved quite quickly after the 1964 elections in 1965. As often happens in history there needs to be a trigger to get public opinion on board when it applies to extending or starting war. LBJ used a surprise Vietcong attack at Pleiku in which 6 American military advisers were killed and 116 wounded on the 6th of February 1865.  LBJ’s aides assisted him with a 2 stage and premeditated contingencies plan , prepared several months before the attack. The first step was a retaliation airstrike in North Vietnam and the second step was to intensify the air war.  History shows this  was implemented in 1965.

It proved that LBJ decided on this level of intervention without really considering the costs and implications. Looking at the last Bush Administration we see that history tend to repeat itself, however the triggers are different. Bush used 9/11 to go to war in Afghanistan and the second step was the war in Iraq. He as well did not consider the costs and the wider implications, a legacy which did leave the US with both a material and immaterial deficit, billions of dollars lost and not being accounted for, a multi trillion budget deficit, more than a million lives being lost and human rights being compromised at the limits against the Convention of Geneva.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dx8-ffiYyzA&feature=player_detailpage                                                                                                                                                                                                                  (Report of the  Gulf of Tonkin incident – LBJ)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HODxnUrFX6k&feature=player_detailpage                                                                                                                            (Gulf of Tonkin: McNamara admits it did not happen)

As part of the slogan “The Great Society” LBJ implemented a few economic and social welfare programs, including MediCare for the elderly and legislation to improve education, whilst increasing the war efforts. He needed this public support at the domestic front to carry out in close coöperation with the military powers a most excessive war program in Vietnam, as this was the agenda of the military leaders in the US.

As a result of the huge war implications in Vietnam an active anti-war movement within the US started to grow with fast increasing levels of public dissatisfaction with LBJ. LBJ was pushed by both the CIA and the Pentagon not to change direction and as both the CIA and Pentagon were the background powers playing a part in the JFK’s assassination with LBJ’s full approval and awareness beforehand, he had not much choice to continue the way it was to aim for a US military victory. By the end of August 1966 only 47% in the US did approve Johnson’s Presidency. The war became increasingly unpopular. By 1968 more than 500000 US military troops were concentrated in Vietnam. The war was costing some 2 billion dollars a month and meanwhile more bombs were dropped in Vietnam than during the second world war.

Within this context the new York Senator Robert Francis Kennedy decided to run for the Presidency in 1968, being a major representative of the anti-war movement and social justice.

LBJ faced “a catch 22 position”. He became aware that the Vietnam was an “ugly war” after his new Defence Secretary Clark Clifford following the replacement of Robert McNamara tried to seek a political solution. LBJ was stuck. With RFK being likely a successful candidate and both the CIA and Pentagon still pushing the war in Vietnam he was facing a  predicament.  The background US powers were loyal to him as there was a reciprocal arrangement between him and the background powers regarding the premeditated JFK assassination and him (LBJ) taking over as US President.  Johnson had no other choice than to resign, in despair. Before this, LBJ did fully support the JFK assassination cover up with installing the Warren Commission and highly CIA favourable representatives running the historical falsehood this Commission provided to mislead the US people and Congress. With LBJ deciding not to be reelected anymore in 1968 it did not mean that the CIA and Pentagon’s directions about Vietnam had changed. This direction needed to be continued after 1968, with still being the issues around the JFK assassination a matter of “national security” not to be disclosed and the direction of Vietnam as part of the same “national security” not to be discontinued. It opened the way for new background dynamics neither to be compromised nor to be disclosed. The powers behind the US President were very smart in playing the democratic systems within the US at their own benefit.

The RFK  assassination including the assassination of Martin Luther King, jr facilitated elections in which Richard Nixon could be elected. Lyndon Johnson could not face the Vietnam war anymore where he could not find a way out without repercussions. He was an unpopular President and as reflected he would likely lose the 1968 elections anyway.The week after LBJ declined to accept the nomination from the Democratic Party for another term as President – Robert Kennedy was assassinated in Los Angeles after winning the California primaries, which would almost secure him to get the Democratic nomination and the Presidency in November 1968.

The anti-war demonstrations were stronger than ever before and the strongest representatives of the anti-war movement were actually Martin Luther King,jr and New York Senator Robert Francis Kennedy. Both the CIA, the FBI with Hoover and  the Pentagon were opposed to the anti-war movement, opposed against a potential RFK being President in 1968.  RFK would have been neither a US President being compromised by the military establishment nor by either the CIA or Hoover from the FBI. With RFK  winning the California primaries in June 1968 he became the person who would likely defeat Nixon in 1968. Nixon was aware of this, like FBI Chief Hoover as well.

Nixon was from CIA perspective 100% save for US military policy and the anti-war movement needed to be broken. First by taking Martin Luther King,jr out of the picture and when Robert Kennedy increased in popularity and became the likely candidate to win the elections after the primaries in California,  the premeditated strategy was to assassinate Kennedy as he was considered to be at this stage the main obstacle for CIA’s defined “national security” . The implications would be horrendous if  Kennedy would be elected President in 1968.  He was perhaps even more determined than his brother John J Kennedy.  Both the FBI (with Hoover still being the Chief) and the CIA could not face this prospect as with RFK being President the withdrawal from Vietnam would become a fact. Hoover would likely lose his job with everything he inflicted at the background of the various scenes he played a role.  However needless to say the JFK assassination with a floored Warren Commission report would be vigorously investigated again and CIA involvement with Lyndon Johnson’s part would be disclosed to the public. As such Kennedy would likely get both Congressional and public support to reorganise the CIA and  bring LBJ to justice. RFK became a security risk. As a US Senator of New York he was of no harm but being the potential next President after Johnson would open all the past corruptions from US Government and “Bobby” would not take any nonsense.  He did not make it.  The cover up was smart and well swallowed by the American public. The question is who gave the order to take him as a second Kennedy out of the picture. Not unlikely there was Presidential approval from Johnson, because Johnson was prepared to pay any price to avoid history catching up on him, and so were the background powers at the same time.

Unrest outside the  1968 Democratic National Convention  in Chicago (Illinois)  with riots and protests by thousands of anti-war demonstrators (many of whom favoured McCarthy)  were crushed on life television by brutal  police force from Chicago (after the RFK assassination in June 1968), – which increased a growing sense of general unrest with the public. The police acted on strict orders from the FBI (Hoover).

Both the combination of LBJ being unpopular, the riots in Chicago and the discouragement of both African – Americans and liberals after the assassinations of both MLK and RFK contributed to that former Vice President Nixon (under Eisenhower) did win the Presidential elections  from Hubert Humphrey (LBJ’s Vice President). Johnson had warned his Vice-President that when he would oppose the war in Vietnam, he would destroy his career.

Robert Kennedy’s assassination did  not only play Nixon  in his favour, but it played Nixon’s close ally Hoover and the CIA in their favour as well, besides the Pentagon.  LBJ likewise did not need to worry about RFK anymore. The secrets of the 22nd of November 1963 in Dallas would be even more secured with Richard Nixon than with Hubert Humphrey, as both Nixon and Johnson had a silent agreement on this issue as both were involved.

The background powers in the US proved to be succesful in their strategic approach with impact on public opinion as well. Richard Nixon did win the Presidential elections carrying  32  States and 301 Electoral votes. Richard Nixon was an old close ally of both Hoover and the “old” military establishment.

The level of LBJ’s violations of Justice

Lyndon Baines Johnson was a highly controversial politician to start with. Smart as a politician, but corrupt before he became even Vice-President.

His involvement in the Bobby Baker scandal did never see the public light in full and the fact that he has been reportedly facilitating an assassination to silence the person who would potentially make his involvement and other corruptions public during the time he was Majority leader of the Senate gives an indication how far he was prepared to go to save his public reputation. He had people working for him to do “the dirty work”.

His ambitions to take over from JFK  started already early in the White House and he was able to create at an early stage already a good relationship with both Hoover and the CIA.  After the Bay of Pigs predicaments he had further dealings with Allen Dulles (who was fired as CIA Director by Kennedy) and Richard Nixon (the architect of the Bay of Pigs plans in Cuba). An important “oil representative” from Texas had a CIA assignment and a growing role at the time. His name was George Herbert Walker Bush, the son of Prescott Bush (1895–1972) a vivid JFK opponent, a close friend of both Nixon and Eisenhower.

Johnson’s  relations with both President Kennedy and in particular Robert Kennedy were strained at times, the least. Robert Kennedy from the beginning was against LBJ’s nomination for the Vice Presidency. Especially both Robert Kennedy and Johnson’s relationship was very tense, – and when Robert Kennedy in his function as Attorney General got to know more about Johnson’s background including his profound corruption (and an earlier assassination)  he decided with his brother the President that the time was there to find an alternative for the Vice Presidency of LBJ  in 1964.

Johnson was actually a  very practical choice during the elections of 1960 as within his role of Majority leader in the Senate he was quite popular. He was known for his tactical approach and many background dealings and very capable in this role. Actually he had hoped to win the democratic Presidential nomination in 1960 and personally he felt he deserved it more than Jack Kennedy.

Days before the JFK assassination Robert Kennedy was in the process of leaking most damaging information to Life Magazine about the Bobby Baker scandal in which Johnson was clearly involved. It would blow his political career for once and for all, however the 22nd of November 1963 did change history for once and for all.

FBI Chief Hoover assisted LBJ to prevent the Bobby Baker scandal leaking to the press after LBJ’s inauguration.

We may assume with LBJ knowing that Robert Kennedy was in the process of ending his political career was determined to prevent this happening at all costs. As he reflected to his mistress on various occasions he felt often utterly embarrassed by the Kennedy’s and before the 22nd of November 1963 he reflected to her that this would soon over, and that it would never happen again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7j5xgNH-P6M&feature=player_detailpage                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     (History is proving LBJ has been responsible for the JFK assassination)

In retrospect Lyndon Baines Johnson should have been never US President. With a positive public image initially of being  reliable and pleasant perhaps he proved otherwise to be ruthless, calculated, unstable, – and violating justice in the worst possible way against US Constitution and against the US law. The JFK assassination, the Warren Commission, key witnesses being assassinated, the Vietnam war etc  do cast a very dark shadow on this otherwise capable man. Being capable and being a person of good integrity not always goes well together as proved in Johnson.

His social reforms were good. It did help public approval whilst LBJ preparing with both the CIA and the Pentagon an immediate and drastic change in the Vietnam policy after the assassination of JFK. There is obviously more to his general Presidential legacy than mentioned in the above.

However concentrating on the issue of violating justice,  the measure of this man was not what he did do wrong at an incidental time of his life by error or mistake or by a relatively minor flaw of character. The issue with LBJ is what he did do wrong as a deliberate act to screw up a Nation as part of a Coupe d’Etat where he was personally involved, allowing as such the assassination of  President John F Kennedy. The orchestrated cover up afterwards in which various other people were killed are part of this history. He got his way, escaping with an FBI assisted cover up of the Bobby Baker scandal when he became President and was forced in a predicament to escalate the war in Vietnam with many American and other soldiers being killed, within a conflict which actually was the conflict of South Vietnam.

Many people in retrospect do consider the war in Vietnam an error of judgement, hence JFK reportedly -and with evidence at the time – wanted to withdraw just before he was assassinated. This was not what the military background powers wanted and together with Lyndon Johnson, supported by the parts of the Executive branch a pending Coupe d’Etat was in the process of preparation. Johnson convinced Kennedy that it was important to go to Dallas in Texas to sort some frictions out in the Democratic Party which would boost his Kennedy’s support in the 1964 elections. Kennedy was warned for going to Texas but the 1964 elections were important and the reasoning of Johnson made sense. Johnson would look after some security issues and both the CIA and FBI would prove to be helpful.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bD4611qW6R8&feature=player_detailpage                                                                                                                                                                                         (E.Howard Hunt implicates Johnson in the JFK assassination – part 1)

The Coupe d’Etat on the 22nd of November 1963 did change  the direction for the US for many years to follow, with still implications in the ruling systems, –  neither allowing nor permitting  justice about the failures of those years during various Administrations afterwards.

Likewise the might of both the CIA and the Pentagon with Presidents either unable or unwilling to tighten control, did escalate both the losses of human lives and the costs of various pointless war’s at a level to bring a Nation on the verge of total financial collapse in 2011, apart from gross injustice being inflicted over the past decades. This happened by choice, neither controlled within the Executive branch nor regulated within the Legislative branch.

In terms of US Presidential profiles in violations of Justice, the participation in the Coupe d’Etat as it happened in 1963, the orchestration of the worst possible political crime in US history buried in the graves of many, did actually create  a precedent or authority  to continue certain trends at the Executive branch increasing the disconnection between citizens and the government.

This was possible in the US and in a way it is still possible. The US Constitution is at the heart of Justice, but neither the Executive branch nor the Legislative branch did allow the justice systems to work in the US as it should be. It would benefit the country so much if this would change and this first chapter on the Presidency of Lyndon Johnson gives an indication where it should have changed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGYrATdJQiY&feature=player_detailpage                                                                                                                         (1960ties  LBJ 1 of 2)

Continued>>>>> in part 4

Former US President Richard Nixon to be discussed in part 4

–

Thank you!

–

 Paul 

–
Paul Alexander Wolf

–

https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2013/01/06/we-dream-of-things-that-never-were-and-say-why-not/

–

Profiles In US Presidential Violations of Justice – Front page (Part 1 of 11) on July 5, 2011

Related articles

• JFK Assassination And Coverup: New Evidence and Testimony Emerges (rinf.com)
• Did JFK seal his fate with plan to dump LBJ? (wnd.com)
• Our First Jewish President Lyndon Johnson? – an update!! (5tjt.com)
• Did JFK seal his fate with plan to dump LBJ? (mobile.wnd.com)
• JFK Assassination: Coverup Continues (rinf.com)
• Oral Histories: Helen Thomas (c-span.org)
• Lake LBJ (jnjelai.wordpress.com)
• Lake LBJ (jnkiera8.wordpress.com)
• BEST OF THE WEB: Who killed Kennedy: CIA, LBJ, or the Truly “Unspeakable”? (sott.net)
• Jigger (interestingwordsbystephendarori.wordpress.com)

Profiles In US Presidential Violations of Justice – Front page (Part 1 of 11)

Presidents of the United States, before 1868 (Photo credit: Penn State Special Collections Library)

Front page of  “Profiles in US Presidential Violations of Justice”. Part 1.

–

Introduction:

–

“Profiles in US Presidential Violations of Justice” gives an overview of some previous US Presidents from the perception of  violations of Justice,  the last including both the law and/or  US Constitution.

The facts are actually somewhat sobering perhaps and offer an insight at the Executive branch of the US where vital decisions are made for both the US, with a considerable impact at times for the whole world.

Those articles are aimed to show certain Presidential dynamics from a different perspective, both to allow discussion on acceptable standards, – however really fully accepting that the perceptions on those Presidencies can be seen from various perspectives and that it is important in all cases to view the broader context, – the last being fair to history itself and the people who tried to give it their own best efforts once they were elected as US President. They did all work in their own time with the dynamics and questions of their own generation and with their own personal struggles. The last should not be forgotten.

Against all wrongdoings there are considerable achievements at various levels, regardless whether we agree or disagree. It is up to historians to judge the wider picture with the available information at the time.

Since the assassination of President John F Kennedy in 1963 the military arm of the US has been increasingly involved in foreign policy making, not rarely with the use of various covert operations at different levels.  See for instance: >>>>>: https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2011/09/14/beyond-911-memorial-services-2011/  and  Anniversary JFK assassination and review  <<<<

The impact of both this influence and the combination of some US Presidents to be discussed has not always been that fortunate.  The profiles on those earlier US President‘s will explain this in  some  detail.

Those profiles on violations of justice however are only restricted to certain aspects or dealings of  those US Presidents, mainly obviously during their years in the White House.

They are, again,  not intended to comment on their legacy in a broader sense.  

Some of those people who were once “US Commander-in-Chief” passed away, others are in retirement. They left behind  valuable examples in areas which could have been dealt with differently. However areas also where they increased the risk on conflict or war, – besides human rights being abused on various occasions.

For certain at times they did  contribute in a wider sense to both the US and the world.

“Profiles in US Presidential Violations of Justice” can be found in the webpages below:

“If  angels  were  to  govern  men, neither  external  nor  internal controls  on government  would be  necessary.  In framing  a government  which  is  to be administered  by  men  over  men, the  great  difficulty  is  this: You  must  first  enable  the  government  to  control  the governed; and  in  the  next  place ,  oblige  it  to  control itself.”

—James Madison, 1788—

–

–

 

“Lincoln  was  not  a  perfect  man, nor  a  perfect  President.  By  modern  standards his condemnation  of slavery  might  be  considered  tentative.”

 —Barack  Obama, Chicago  Tribune,  June, 25, 2005

–

–

->>>>>>>>>>>

 

>Profiles in US Presidential Violations of Justice – Introduction  (Part 2 of 11) on July 4, 2011

–

–

US Presidential profiles in violations of Justice (Part 3 – former US President Johnson) on July 16, 2011

–

–

US Presidential profiles in violations of Justice  (Part 4 – former President Nixon) on July 19, 2011

–

–

US Presidential profiles in violations of Justice  (Part 5 – former President Ford) on July 20, 2011

–

–

US Presidential profiles in violations of Justice.  (Part 6 – former President Carter, the exception) on July 28, 2011

–

–

US Presidential profiles in violations of Justice. (Part 7 – former President Ronald Reagan) on August 1, 2011

–

–

US Presidential profiles in violations of Justice. (Part 8 – former President H.W. Bush) on August 6, 2011

–

–

US Presidential profiles in violations of Justice. (Part 9 – former President W. J. Clinton) on August 9, 2011

–

–

>US Presidential profiles in violations of justice. (Part 10 – former President G.W. Bush) on August 13, 2011

–

–

>Profiles  in  US  Presidential  Violations  of  Justice  (Part 11 – Epilogue  & Summary) on August 21, 2011

–

–

—–>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

–

In the article below President Barack Obama is discussed as a prime example of setting better standards since President John F Kennedy. This however is not within the context of “Profiles in US Presidential Violations of Justice” as the last goes from President L.B. Johnson until President  G. W. Bush. It is only an addition or example how things can be different at this level of executive power. The article about President Obama is an interim assessment before his re-election. Whilst every US President will be faced with confidential injustice, for every person in this position applies at times the question how much justice can be  served with injustice. Keeping the right balance between those paradoxes and utilising the choice of serving the best possible justice with a candid exposure of the facts at both inner-team level and the public will give the best possible reflection on each US President, as long ethical the best possible choices are made. This does not take away that for President Obama e.g. applies as well that he has an agenda which he wants to push through amidst the separation of powers in the US.

–

–

Whilst the separation of powers are aimed to protect the US, it insufficiently protected the US during the last decades. History will show in retrospect how President Obama played the bouncing ball game of tensions and dimensions at this level to get his agenda for more social justice through.

–

Thank you!

–

 Paul 

–
Paul Alexander Wolf

>https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2011/05/18/interim-assessment-of-a-uspresident/     

–

https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2013/01/06/we-dream-of-things-that-never-were-and-say-why-not/

–

Related articles

• President Obama’s Top 10 Constitutional Violations Of 2013 (ijreview.com)
• President Obama’s Top 10 Constitutional Violations of 2013 (thedailysheeple.com)
• President Obama’s Top 10 Constitutional Violations Of 2013 (govtslaves.info)
• Best Presidential Address (liberaldesi.wordpress.com)
• Tears, Fires and Evasions: The Sentimental Repackaging of George W. Bush (lareviewofbooks.org)
• President Obama’s Top 10 Constitutional Violations Of 2013 (votingamericanblog.wordpress.com)
• Obama’s Top 10 Constitutional Violations Of 2013 (tomohalloran.com)
• President Obama slaps the American people in the face with his top 10 Constitutional violations of 2013 (youngcons.com)
• Forbes: ‘President Obama’s Top 10 Constitutional Violations of 2013′ (dancingczars.wordpress.com)
• Presidential pillockry! (adscam.typepad.com)

Profiles in US Presidential Violations of Justice – Introduction (Part 2 of 11)

>>INTRODUCTION<<

–

The White House Southside (Photo credit: Glyn Lowe Photoworks)

“Democracy…while it lasts is more bloody than either aristocracy or monarchy.     Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There is never a democracy that did not commit suicide.”  – John Adams  (1735 – 1826)

“A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people”.  – John F Kennedy (1917 – 1963)

“I know my country has not perfected itself. At times, we’ve struggled to keep the promise of liberty and equality for all our people. We’ve made our share of mistakes, and there are times when our actions around the world have not lived up to our best intentions”.                                           – Barack Obama (1961 –   )

In addition to the first chapter the following comments are justified as part of a broader introduction.

The circles of Washington are  mysterious , dark and deep,  and each President has to balance wisely before he sleeps, – balance wisely before he sleeps.

Robert Frost  with his quote:  “The woods are lovely dark and deep, but I have promises to keep and miles to go before I sleep, – and miles to go before I sleep…”, – phrased it slightly differently.

However, – despite the promises  the balance of how far one can go and except degrees of injustice to meet  perhaps more justice eventually, proved different for each US President. Sometimes it takes an inch,  sometimes it takes indeed miles.  However in general much depends on the integrity, the ideology and the wisdom of  the US President, besides obviously the circumstances  to be addressed, – but also the persons being nominated (or already in place) to advise the President on matters of both domestic and foreign policy.

Many issues as we know evolve in close coöperation with a variety of advisers, apart from e.g. Agencies such as  the FBI, the CIA and  the Pentagon.  Those Agencies in good  hands  serve for certain the right purpose as long as they stick to their original assignments.

“Profiles in Presidential violations of Justice”  does  not discuss the current US President ( Barack Obama)  as such as he still is at an early stage of his Presidency.  The article “Interim assessment of a President” (within this Blog)  gives a more detailed indication on this remarkable first African American President.

Presidential dynamics have not been always the same in US history and the selection of people in key positions of the Pentagon and the CIA  (after President Truman established the CIA in 1947) are and will be  always vital where it comes to both competence and integrity within the scope of the various obligations of those Agencies, – especially where US Presidents rely on the intelligence provided by those Agencies.

“Profiles in US Presidential violations of Justice” does neither go into the finer details on the lives of some US Presidents in the past,  nor does it mention the broader legacy in any extended detail.

“Profiles in US Presidential violations of Justice”  is a reflection only on some significant incidents against the principles of justice, some worse than others. However what those Presidents did at crucial moments during their Presidency against this justice, sometimes already before entering this office,  has been a touchstone of their character. Not rarely it did effect far too many people.

Any new President at the start is facing the challenge to set up a cabinet of capable, effective and reliable people. Besides this there is the  building up of relationships with the various existing Government agencies including the Pentagon, which are all vital to set the tone for the rest of the Administration in the years lying ahead.  All those people and groups contribute to the making of a President but obviously the Presidency itself  provides the required choices to show what lies ahead. Those final choices give directions, –  either being in the positive or in the negative. Once an US President get compromised it is difficult at times to get out of it, depending on the strength of character.  John F Kennedy took e.g. the full blame of the Bay of Pigs failures which was however related with poorly provided information by the CIA.  Presidential failures still, whether they are genuine or deliberate, provide valuable lessons for the future. Deliberate actions to mislead the public with a criminal background or intend are obviously far more serious than the genuine mistakes anybody can make in such a place, as long there is evidence that  some quality ways to reach certain decisions were in place.

“Profiles in US Presidential violations of Justice” gives an insight in the complexities and different dynamics of various Presidential Administrations and the choices being made. It starts  from the 22nd of November 1963 (when President John F Kennedy was assassinated) until the 21st of January 2009 when the last Bush Administration  ended and the Obama Administration did begin.

The greater call for all Presidents was to do better for the country and serve as such, besides obviously personal ambitions. Those last 2 aspects might have been different for each President. The ways and the programs have been different as well. Likewise the level of integrity has been different for earlier Presidents being faced with the bigger questions and the larger  picture,  which did include  the Presidential coöperation with various US security Agencies and the dealings with both US Congress and US law. It proves that whatever is public knowledge is not always the truth, and that some Presidents were in principle and by principle compromised already before they took the Presidential oath to the Constitution.

Some US Presidents  did contribute towards a program for domestic reforms whilst at the same time approving various CIA covert operations at a level neither in line with morality nor US law.

Both the Pentagon and the CIA have the duty to protect the interests of the US and make recommendations  to the President, who has the final responsibility of decision-making.

Both Agencies have admirable people on board with the highest levels of integrity and duty of service where it comes to the protection of the US against dangers from abroad, – whether those dangers are inflicted by eg Al-Qaeda terrorist cells at present, or dangers of so-called rogue states who may prove an increasing danger in the future. The past showed  however under various Presidents that those Agencies were not governed (anymore) by some reasonable required standards of morality, or accuracy in providing intelligence or security information.  Neither did it prove that the Presidential powers as they were exercised were in line with the required standards given by US Law and Constitution.

“Profiles in US Presidential violations of Justice”  gives at least an insight where and how those standards with some Presidents failed, and it gives  an insight why they  failed and which areas of systems might be subject for further improvement.

Dangerous situations may arise when Government Agencies are not operating under the full control of the US President, or when e.g. the nominated persons being CIA Director or chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff do not have full control of both  “the culture” and working dynamics of their own organisations, or when they simply hide information for the purpose of their own agenda’s. The system fails as well when those Agencies (the FBI included)  have an Organisational agenda neither being in alignment within the Constitutional balance of powers, nor with US law.

History proves that there have been incidents in which US Presidents acted on proper and correct information of those Agencies, however history proves as well that if the US President would have acted on the intelligence provided, – the world would not have existed anymore as due to failures to give complete information as required. The Cuba crisis in 1962 is a clear example of this.

The Assassination of US President John F. Kennedy in 1963 did show many years later CIA involvement,  including  involvement at the highest US political powers in the cover up. All for various dark reasons and both – needless to say – against the Constitution and the US law.  The public was seriously misled by the Warren Commission and some do show  that the “9/11 Commission” was of similar nature with the intend to mislead US citizens. The people supposed to protect the Constitution and the law at the time,  were reportedly involved in various cover up’s at the highest levels of Government, – which is neither a good reflection of a democracy nor the justice systems being supposed to be fully operational without discrimination of any nature.

History does further show that US Presidents already compromised before they even started their Presidency, were unlikely to resist the pressures from above Agencies.  For this reason they did collaborate  in close coöperation with some of those Agencies at times the independent view and the wisdom of the President was required to make final decisions. The lack of required integrity did involve certain activities neither known by the public, nor by Congress, – and obviously profoundly against US law or common justice.

In the most positive scenario, “Profiles in US Presidential violations of justice” may support further discussion to improve the regulation systems within “the US balance of powers”. The last actually to protect the US against itself.  If those systems do not improve, some  historical events being reflected on  would be able to  repeat itself with an unpredictable and different identity.  Those situations could potentially provoke  the most dangerous situations the US as a Republic and Democracy could face.

US Presidents may fail for various reasons, as long as the detection systems (including the internal checks within the Constitutional balance of powers) do not fail, and as long it is clear that neither US Presidents, nor the CIA,   neither Officials of the Pentagon nor any other Agency, are able to work outside the powers of the law, or the Constitution, or outside the legitimate requirements of  US  Congress.

US Presidents (with full Congressional support) need  to be strong enough to rule the major background powers in the US, –  based on fair common sense and proper value systems with evidently both the broader picture in mind, together with a high level of integrity.

Within the context of those earlier Presidential dynamics including a variety of covert operations for different reasons, it is realistic to say that never ever had the US so much to lose or so much to gain, and that all decisions within the US Constitution delegated to the Executive branch should be based on merit and purpose for the US future itself.  Hence the political system in the US needs to work optimal in line with the principles provided by both the law and the Constitution.

With the fall of communism but still an ongoing Arab – Israeli conflict;  with wars in Vietnam and Iraq behind us, but still the fight against al-Qaeda and the Taliban as part of the war in Afghanistan (where the “war on terror” designed to defend Western values escalated into a conflict with disregard for human rights), – we now may face a reality that China may overtake the US as the world’s greatest superpower. Where the Holocaust did show  genocide at a never experienced scale,  the cold war brought us close to global nuclear destruction in 1962 through incomplete management and advise of both the CIA and the Pentagon against the dangers inflicted by the Soviets. It was wise management however of John F. Kennedy as President which saved the world due to his independent and broader views. The US needs internal protection that a history of military confrontation for the wrong reasons, is not going to compromise a  future for the right reasons.

The US has a history of many costly wars which brought the federal budget deficit at record level without any proportionate benefit, however never took it the time and the opportunity to reëxamine its own attitude and responsibility in the many predicaments it both faced and created.

It takes the wider community of US Government Executives and Controlling powers to raise the US above the standards of the past, and to embrace both the opportunities and challenges of the future with a wise balance of principle centred leadership where proper value systems are at the core of the decisions being made. The last to ease a direction towards more positive global dynamics, based on fruitful interdependence with in the end a better economy and prosperity for those nations being involved. This direction includes reduction of terror activities by at least not provoking this terror within the domain of US power.

“Profiles in US Presidential violations of Justice”  gets at the heart of this required principle centred leadership –  with examples where it went wrong against both the Constitution and the law.

Each Presidential profile offers material for sustained discussion as it does touch base on the fundamental question which direction to go in a world facing more dangers than ever before. The response on problems, crisis and disasters is as important as those pending disasters, crisis and problems itself and it will be clear that US response in e.g.areas of  foreign policy has been highly inadequate and dangerous at times.

The following 8 chapters will picture the problems and foundations of the decision-making US Presidents differently and the last epilogue will summarise some events.

Next article will start with Lyndon Baines Johnson, the 36th President who took over after the assassination of President John F Kennedy.

–

Thank you!

–

 Paul 

–
Paul Alexander Wolf

–

https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2013/01/06/we-dream-of-things-that-never-were-and-say-why-not/

–

Profiles In US Presidential Violations of Justice – Front page (Part 1 of 11) on July 5, 2011

Related articles

• The only thing we have to fear is CIA (rinf.com)
• Truman’s True Warning on the CIA (consortiumnews.com)
• SIX JFK SHOOTERS, THREE TIED TO CIA, NAMED – Oswald not among them (stateofglobe.com)
• The only thing we have to fear is CIA (truthfrequencyradio.com)
• SIX JFK SHOOTERS, THREE TIED TO CIA, NAMED – Oswald not among them (veteranstoday.com)
• Presidential pillockry! (adscam.typepad.com)
• President Obama’s Top 10 Constitutional Violations Of 2013 (ijreview.com)
• Gen. Michael ‘No Probable Cause’ Hayden (consortiumnews.com)
• FOCUS | The Only Thing We Have to Fear…Is the CIA (readersupportednews.org)
• The Only Thing We Have To Fear… (lewrockwell.com)

Review JFK Assassination 2011: An issue for both Democrats and Republicans.

 

 

This article has been edited and reviewed in November 2013. See contents below:  Anniversary JFK assassination and review

 

Anniversary JFK assassination and review

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.

Anniversary JFK assassination and review

Let us think of education as the means of developing our greatest abilities, because in each of us there is a private hope and dream which, fulfilled, can be translated into benefit for everyone and greater strength for our nation.

Change is the law of life. And those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future.

Our progress as a nation can be no swifter than our progress in education. The human mind is our fundamental resource.

The cost of freedom is always high, but Americans have always paid it. And one path we shall never choose, and that is the path of surrender, or submission.

Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.

A child miseducated is a child lost.

The farmer is the only man in our economy who buys everything at retail, sells everything at wholesale, and pays the freight both ways.

The unity of freedom has never relied on uniformity of opinion.

Anniversary JFK assassination and review

Every society gets the kind of criminal it deserves. What is also true is that every community gets the kind of law enforcement it insists on.

Anniversary JFK assassination and review

 

 Paul 

–
Paul Alexander Wolf

–

https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2013/01/06/we-dream-of-things-that-never-were-and-say-why-not/

Related articles

• Fascinated with the JFK assassination? There is an app for it. (womenlovetech.com)
• A JFK assassination book that stays away from conspiracies? (ask.metafilter.com)
• Behind the Scenes With JFK (nation.time.com)
• Stabilised Footage Of The JFK Assassination Is Unsettlingly Real (gizmodo.com.au)
• Conspiracy continuation (jonathanhockey.wordpress.com)
• Fox Politicizes The Kennedy Assassination: JFK Was A Conservative Murdered By A Liberal (newshounds.us)
• Stabilized Footage of the JFK Assassination Is Unsettlingly Real (gizmodo.com)
• JFK assassination intertwined with Project Northwoods – Andrew Kreig (voiceofrussia.com)
• The Mastermind of the JFK Assassination w/ Dr. Walt Brown (disclose.tv)
• Dallas’ Weird Upcoming Celebration Of JFK’s Assassination (esquire.com)

Let’s take the torch forward

English: Posthumous official presidential portrait of U.S. President John F. Kennedy, painted by Aaron Shikler (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Good evening – or good morning – wherever you are at this hour.

–

Wherever you might be in your life, or wherever you will be in the future, – the future being the most important thing for all of us. The future we all cherish, – if we still have dreams or things to do.

The future which lives in us, – and we live in this future. A future still in which we are able to live our dreams and desires for a better world.

The future is important for us because in the future lies our growth.

The growth which we all cherish for ourselves and for our children.

A future which will be the result of the decisions we make, either as persons, or as a people, – as citizens of the world.

What sort of future do we seek and what sort of world do we have?

Is what we see a world only of conflicting national interests and international fear, on a planet which bears the burden of increasing environmental degradation, – increasing disasters of nature and the risk of war?

Is what we see only perhaps ourselves, trying to keep up with day-to-day life, finding a job , keeping a job and push as hard as possible to live the life we want to live for ourselves and our family?

A world of hope perhaps, – despite the enormity of sorrow?  A world with a future, despite agonising questions about both the past and the present? – –

Whatever the way we live and in whatever circumstances we are, there is still a world with opportunities,  if we are able to decide to live up to that future and face the questions as they are, – find the answers and actions which we need. The questions, answers and actions of our time, – as one global community.

A future in which we hope to survive the challenges which we face today, in our time, and for all times. Not only for this generation, but for all generations. For our children and their children. Long after we have gone ourselves.

In our days as a human race, we need to be remembered not for the victory of wars, but for the victory of the human spirit, which dictates us to show our common humanity at all corners of the world.

Is this our quest for peace?

It is my wish to discuss some of the major challenges of our time, – the potential events we face as a people on this planet.  A pathway perhaps to take the torch forward to a new birth of freedom, – for all those people who seek this freedom and this peace, – unwilling as well to sacrifice the future of this world on the altar of increasing nuclear threat or war. War either by miscalculation or misinterpretation the nature of people, or disaster by underestimating the force of nature itself.

Let everybody know that in the long history of the world, we are still embattled in the search for this new birth of freedom, based on the perils of liberty and a free choice. Based as well on the examples of people who lived before us. Based on the aftermath of many wars,  and captured in the spirit of hope to live up to the standards and obligations of  this freedom. Freedom which looks to the future with responsibility, based on conscious, –  but knowing that human nature is neither perfect, nor will it ever be.

Many pointless wars have been endured and will again happen all over the world. Many families and soldiers still traumatized as a result of often ill selected battle fields, wherever they took place, wherever they may take place. Many people having to face death going to war, and if they survive  – having to face what died in their heart and their personal lives, as the human spirit does neither cope with e.g. the past killing fields in Vietnam & Cambodia,-  neither will it cope with the potential of mass destruction in the Middle East or anywhere else on this world.

This will be our fate and that of our children, if the means by which we are able to fight wars are not extinguished from earth, or from our decisions to fight those wars. Too many countries with irrational leaders have potential access to nuclear energy, and may opt to set fire to this world.

War itself in some occasions might a necessary evil where the liberties of the free world are at stake, as happened e.g. in the 2^nd World War. However, more and more is required to secure all efforts to reverse at an early stage the processes leading up to war, – as war with the long-lasting destruction ability as we have now –  neither predictable nor controllable when it starts – is no longer a rational alternative, – as President John F Kennedy once said.

It is for us the living,  dedicated to the unfinished task of others and dedicated to the outstanding task still remaining,  to make our time a better time and to make our world a better place. To make our world a better and safer place to live, as there are conditions and circumstances on this planet of far more importance than the strict national interests as defined within the perceptions of existing nations. We need to shift the perceptions on the world as it developed in the last decades, to one of harmonising our global interest with our national interest, and educate the leaders of UN member states – mixed as the interests are – to do the same. To shift towards a global awareness on what is really important to survive together as a global community, interdependent as we are.

At the end of the day we are not only a world of Christians, Muslims or Jews. We are not a world of blacks and whites, but we are a world of people with similar needs, occupying the same planet, having the same right on some space to live, the same right on food and water. We are all breathing the same air, and we all mortal and fragile in our basic humanity.

All of us – at some stage – will be struggling with disease, – physical and mental decline, – and many of us will be affected by the increasing agony of our environmental degradation, including the disasters of nature, –  of any kind.

There is too much to say and far more to add.

But blessed are those people who are the peace keepers in this world, – those politicians as well, who affirm to peace and shy away from military confrontation, but stick however to the principles of finding solutions for both national and international problems.

Those principles do not only include solutions for both the roots of hatred and violence on this globe, but help to erode the barriers from past generations, and give new directions for different ways – and old perceptions to change. Those principles include the use in this generation of different and new requirements, adapted to the needs of tomorrow. The last not only as part of our national interest, but foremost as part of our global interest. Not only as part of the interest of our own environment, but as part of the interest of our global environment, which does not allow anymore to cut corners for the benefit of those who suffer the least.

We have to carry forward the torch of the legacy of some  forebears, who stood for the same principles, who stood their ground – with this hope – and with this spirit – and we have to  renew this spirit in our time and for all times, within the endeavours for this generation and all generations.  The torch of protecting humanity at all corners of the earth.

Tyranny, poverty, disease and the prospect of war itself are the great challenges of our time. Where civilization does not succeed in the battle with those challenges, those challenges will succeed the battle to end the prospect of life on earth. As free people we end up with the last choice. As free people we may decide and if we  do not decide properly, our learning –together with our freedom will be in vain.

In too many cities and countries around the world, peace is not secure, because the obligations of freedom and a free choice are not fulfilled.

It is fair to say that in the world of today, still at least half of its population lives amidst the chains of poverty and disease, and many are the slaves of some of the so-called modern dictators – those who violate their conscious and their Creator – , those who are the champions of oppression, the jailers of freedom and the enemies of the free spirit of man. They include those people who make human rights abuses their business, the business of human trafficking included.

Divided we often are, united we can be– united in our efforts to ease the burdens of those who are born in the millions of families without the prospect of living in peace and proper education. Those families all over the world, often in conditions of war , and many of those people now the  new generation of refugees, always on the move from one place to the other. Homeless, in either their own or different countries. Not only as a result of war yesterday but as a result of climate change and other things “tomorrow”,  –  increasing sea levels and other disasters of nature.

I think we should not simply add a new chapter to the misery of mankind, but write a new story on  the prospect of different frontiers in the history of humanity. And write this story in the hearts and the minds of people all over the world. A frontier which proclaims to protect life on earth and dictates wisdom in the use of our energies. A frontier which may reach all corners of this planet, if we decide to commit and not to compromise, – compromised as we often are..

Let it be said that when  we have the means to reach the moon, and save no cost to get this right, – or save no cost to fight the wars we should not fight, – we could change history by spending most of the required resources in building factories of hope for those who deserve it most. Not only in the countries of the rich, but together as well in the countries of the poor.

I think as  free citizens of this world, we need increasingly ask what to do about our global interest, because with the historic endeavours  we face to overcome the obstacles which will challenge our life in the next 20 years – united only our planet will survive with us – and we shall survive with our planet.

I think that on the mountains of civilization, we must put an end to the valleys of war and terror, before  war and terror may end the high ground of civilization.  If we don’t learn the lessons from history of too many wars and its potential destruction in the world of today, by not changing our thoughts on our culture, on real progress to make, – the history book of our culture and all cultures is closing in to an end.

However, rather than the terror of tyranny being allowed infiltrating the liberties of free man, let free man all together restrict the limitations of the tyranny from terror, wherever on this planet, whenever it strikes again!

Where nations fail to act on the misery created or provoked in neighbouring countries, either by war or by the forces of nature, – they are collective responsible for the suffering of human beings.

Young citizens of this world without hope or education easily follow the recruitment steps of terrorists, with hatred among the domain of the living, and either violence or death within the targets of their armed domains.  We know what they can do, – we don’t know what they may do.

Still too many people enjoy the comfort of ill-founded opinions and not the discomfort of their inner thoughts which could be the motor of change, and part of our education needs to provoke our real thoughts about the future of our world, and the contributions we are able to make as simple human beings.

All people on this planet have the right to live within liberty and dignity for each other. We can’t turn back from this pledge at this stage for the world, without compromising the spirit of humanity, wherever country we may live.

We can’t turn away with so so many children to educate, so many families and jobs to protect, so many dispossessed people to care for, and so many economic and environmental problems to solve.  So much to deal with as well in terms of urban and rural poverty, and so many reconstruction to prepare for.

Both the material and immaterial costs of war and preparing for it will create and contribute to increasing problems of instability, the misery of refugees, lasting terror, ethnic conflicts, increasing global financial crisis, – whilst there need to be still the resources for justified wars like the war against all this kind of poverty, the war against disease and the war against the disasters of nature and terror.

Let it be said that if we don’t put an end to the roots of terror and it’s ghetto’s, the ghetto’s of terror will worsen the risk of conflict at international level, – with potentially more people to be killed and incinerated in the fires of a nuclear encounter than at any time in the history of humankind.

I think where poverty more often creates the prospect of terror, we need to defeat the prospect of the worst poverty, as this is neither the domain of our humanity, nor the domain of real freedom and responsibility.

Where international misunderstanding and misalignment may put an end to mankind let it be proclaimed that humanity first and forever must put an end to international misunderstanding and misalignment, by principle centred leadership. The last which needs to be encouraged all over the world.

We faced many changes in history.

Production and industry changed and evolved. It shifted to highly qualified manufacturing and advanced service industries. We left the Industrial Age behind, but still follow the perceptions of the Industrial Age model in too many business entities, where people are “a cost” , and not an asset in an age of knowledge workers.

There is and has been an oversupply of workers at the lower end of the economy. Quite a number of those people ended in cheap labour at the bottom end of the income scale, not only in Europe or the US, but in other countries as well, where companies with their production lines and policies, shifted their lines of production to those areas overseas where the cheapest labour was possible.

I think we need to get a practical and principle centred approach where no one injustice, however grave, is above all others, and this approach needs to start in all communities where people prefer justice rather than injustice, where people prefer real communities rather than ghetto’s, whether they are the ghetto’s of the rich or the ghetto’s of the poor, as many ghetto’s there are..

We live in a world where power decides outcomes and our approach needs to be practical based, on the moral realities and possibilities of our position to move things in the right direction. If we decide our direction with wisdom and restraint for the benefit of humanity, we may change the many imperfections from yesterday for at least some improvements tomorrow.

We know that the ark of Noah was not built on its own. Neither any major accomplishment was the work of one person. In the world of today we are more dependent on each other than ever before.

We know as well that there are countries where people have no moral principles anymore. Principles to lift the darkness of their own conscious and attitudes.  More often  those people have seen too much violence, too much hatred, too much corruption and the worst examples of human living.  This only contributes to the imperfection of human nature and is not allowed to get into the mainstream of civilisation, as such cancer could destroy civilisation.

We are all mortal and have no permanent ownership on anything of this earth. However if one country denies an other country to exist and aims to prepare arms to destroy the other, the international community needs to cage this poison, before its venom may poison the region into the bitterness of death, – and the age into nuclear destruction.

And so, fellow citizens all over the world – our international obligation is not an obligation to bear nuclear arms, though arms we need, not an obligation to battle, though history faced us with battle, – but an obligation to struggle the battle of humanity for a better world, – to struggle and overcome the spirit of darkness in our time, which includes poverty, tyranny, disease, widespread global crime and corruption, the risk of self-inflicted ecological disaster, increasing disasters of nature, hyper consumption, – and finally war itself.

We face global warming and our long-term sustainability is limited. We need to find new solutions for world water resources and end international water disputes, – we need to share our resources of knowledge and keep together the Oceans clean.

We need to make united efforts to protect habitats in danger, as on the long run increasing habitats in danger may endanger humans as well.

We tend to use unsustainable natural resources and with the growing global population we may have run out by 2075.  The choice to go nuclear in our energy supply by the so-called modern nuclear plants may evolve on a more global base, with ramifications often poorly understood at present.

Where the spirit of human kind is not ready yet for an enduring international peace, there is little room to increase the dimensions of nuclear energy. What is for peaceful use today, can be used for nuclear warheads tomorrow. Besides this the risk of radiation in even the best equipped powerplants are subject to failure if the unexpected strikes, either by nature war or terror.

Some would say , and with justification, that our market forces operated across the global economy are potential most volatile and often irrational, – with strong fluctuating oil prices. Energy security is a matter of ongoing concern. Countries depending on eg gas from Russia and the Ukraine, as due to changing prices, may feel inclined to use eventually increasing nuclear power, – which will be  subject to widespread  suspicion as due to the potential on less peaceful use.

Under the “Kyoto Agreement “all EU countries are supposed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but with the lack of renewable energy sources more countries will use the new generation of Nuclear Power Stations, not only in Eastern Europe, but across the Middle East as well. Hence the united efforts to make the world a safe environment, and cut the potential of this power being used for destructive forces of any kind. Even conventional wars in countries possessing nuclear power plants, where such power plants are either damaged or destroyed, may give radiation ramifications far worse than the Chernobyl disaster  where those nuclear power plants become a target.

Going increasing nuclear in our energy supply will give the wrong message and is in a way cutting corners in terms of safety of our environment, at a significant cost of the next generations.

We face an increasing hungry planet with worldwide between 800 and 850 million people suffering from hunger, and widespread malnutrition in Asia, Afghanistan, Cambodia, Tajikistan and North Korea, – some countries with a long history of civil conflict. 

It is well-known that the problems of Africa have enormous proportions, where most problems are rather political than environmental. Global rates of malnutrition are overwhelming. Somalia almost ceased to exist as due to hunger, nearly similar with Nigeria – the last by some considered as being the most corrupt country of the world. Of the world’s 50 poorest countries, 34 are in Africa, all of them with high HIV rates.

This is grossly our world in a nutshell – and there is far more than this.

Where East and West do meet in conscious and with purpose, with the required discipline passion and vision, there will be ultimately peace and shared resources of wisdom to solve the problems of this earth.

There where East and West meet at evil’s end, – there will be war and destruction, without the required resources to repair at any stage the global problems we may face in the aftermath.

Where the Assembly of the United Nations often appears not being effective enough in finding a common approach for resolving both the problems of the tyranny of poverty and the poverty of tyranny, this is mainly due to insufficient moral leadership of some of the membership countries.

Our global interests requires vigorously enforced non nuclear proliferation , supported by all nations on the earth. And those countries behaving outside such treaty, losing their credibility and provoking a nuclear or biochemical threat to others, – ultimately need to be caged with force if so required. The attitudes from yesterday are not the ethics for tomorrow, in which we face the world today.

Our highest achievement is the preservation and cultivation of life, where this appears possible. If moral leadership is the core of our aspirations, responsibility at a global perspective will lift the world and will ease the burden of our planet, but not without national and international law enforcement.

Let everybody know that if we don’t erode old barriers, old barriers will erode us.

Let us not allow that any person or country destroys the idea of a new and better world, neither by violence nor war. Neither by living nor death. Neither by the mountains of our obstacles nor by the valleys of our despair, when we face what we have to face – to make responsible freedom come true..

And so we have no choice than to carry forward this torch. To carry forward and  set ourselves free from the slavery of the past, whether it is the slavery of the dictator or the slavery of our own thoughts, the slavery to either inflated perceptions or poverty at heart.

And so we may ask every day for the best possible perceptions. The best possible perceptions at any time we face, for both the better and the worse. For both the world in us and the world around us.

And then we may say: we are free, – free at last!!

Thank you!

–

 Paul 

–
Paul Alexander Wolf

 –

https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2013/12/06/rest-well-golden-eagle-in-memory-of-nelson-mandela/

–

 https://paulalexanderwolf.wordpress.com/2011/10/27/the-art-of-leadership-and-lessons-from-the-past-gandhi/

–

Related articles

• Environmental degradation: Way to human doom (thehimalayantimes.com)
• On the nature and causes of environmental violence (climateandcapitalism.com)
• In election year, parties must remember India’s national interests (Comment: Special to IANS) (vancouverdesi.com)
• Torch Network, an Antifascist Network (iwwboston.org)
• Ukraine’s far-right Svoboda party hold torch-lit Kiev march (arunbabyveranakunnel.wordpress.com)
• Restoring the Sacred Land: An Inquiry into the Origins and Implications of Land-ownership (thehamptoninstitute.wordpress.com)
• Kim Jong Un Delivers New Year’s Address and Visits Ku’msusan (nkleadershipwatch.wordpress.com)
• “America’s Vital Interests, Pt. 2,” By Ted McAllister (nomocracyinpolitics.com)
• In election year, parties must remember India’s national interests (dnaindia.com)
• The Sochi Games| Negativity Begets Positivity? (247sportshub.com)