Nazis, nazis, everywhere

Five of the top ten threads on the Education Forum have to do with Nazis murdering JFK.

I can't stand it.

Steve Thomas

Seriously. The front page is a Nazi bingo board, and most of the comments are sheer lunacy. Hell I’ve resorted to riling up Griffith over Vietnam out of boredom cause there’s barely anything else to do over there.

It’s a dumpster fire!

How did Nazis cover up and benefit from the JFK assassination?

What role did the 3 tramps play in the Nazi conspiracy, or any JFK assassination conspiracy for that matter? Did they skedaddle across the parking lot after firing the shots and were somehow missed by Lee Bowers? Did they maintain the liquor cabinet for a last minute shot of liquid courage for the shooters or to toast their success?

The only role I can see is if they might have been used to swap out any real assassins that might have been in custody at the DPD/Dallas County jail. Anyone actively involved in the shooting/getaway was safe or long gone by the time the tramps were rousted.

JFK_FNG wrote:Seriously. The front page is a Nazi bingo board, and most of the comments are sheer lunacy. Hell I’ve resorted to riling up Griffith over Vietnam out of boredom cause there’s barely anything else to do over there.

I doubt Vietnam had anything to do with the JFK assassination. They got their war. And they fucked it up. You would think that if they were competent enough to carry out the assassination and powerful enough to cover it up, they would not have conducted the war in such a haphazard fashion.

The CIA was consistently more realistic (skeptical) about the progress in the war and the intelligence. It was the Pentagon that inflated the body counts and bombing damage.

It was the CIA that revealed that the bomber gap and missile gap were bullshit. Hardly the actions of an organization dedicated to sabotaging nuclear disarmament. (Not to say they were not out of control in other areas) I don’t recall the CIA undermining Nixon’s detente initiatives, it was the Pentagon.

Cuba is a far more likely reason.

There are things about Castro and Cuban angles that do not pass the pub test.*

Castro was in Bogota when Gaitan was taken out. He was a prime suspect of the State Dept and conservative media who all labelled him as a communist. The Cuban-American he fled Colombia with Castro, was an infiltrator of Castro's student org for either CIA or military intel. Castro eventually lured him back to Cuba and arrested him. 

How then did it come to pass that the US aided Castro's assent to the presidency and then express such shock and horror when he began socializing everything? 

Even the formation of the FPCC is highly suspicious because it also just doesn't pass the pub test. Hell, it wouldn't even pass the A Current Affairs test**.  Tracy Grimshaw and her merry band of foot-in-the-door reporters would have sorted all of this out within one half hour show. 


* Anything government does that is deemed by a bunch of old drunks in a pub on their 7th beer, to be suspicious. 

** Anything at all that attracts the attention of A Current Affair has automatically failed the A Current Affairs test. There is nothing that gets past this team and nothing they cannot resolve, from a good old fashioned neighbor Vs neighbor war through to why the Prime Minister doesn't hold a hose.

Totally ridiculous. They are so much in love with their pet theories that they are unwilling to consider the flaws in their claims. But then again most of them regard it as a parlor game and do not have much if any interest in getting the case reopened.

Steve Thomas wrote:Five of the top ten threads on the Education Forum have to do with Nazis murdering JFK.

I can't stand it.

Steve Thomas

The Nazi hunters show the same self-assured arrogance as the two Oswald brigade and the PM / Oswald alibi posse. 

Out of the three groups, only one will ever have their arrogance justified.  The other two  are only setting themselves up to look like the absolute tits they are. 

The Thirteen Inch Head Emporium is a classic example of what happens when your basic credo places "playing nice" above having a new research imperative and enforces it in a shambolic or biased fashion (depending on the moderator) and also by the ban on certain descriptors. This path was first taken by the Very Proper Englshman, John Simkins as a way of protecting his favorite authors from hard questions. In fact, he really set the forum up specifically for those authors.

This path inevitably made it the ideal home for grifters, trolls and the deluded, who could all get away with anything so long as they did it politely. 

At the moment, I have Ms Sharp firmly in the deluded category. 

I know for a fact that members have been bailing out of there because of this and the oocasional gaslighting over the holocaust.

When the British handed off their global empire to the US, they retained their tactic of working with anyone if it was to their geostrategic or economic benefit. The US took very good notes. The Germans did this too when they shipped Lenin back into Russia, Stalin with the Hitler-Stalin pact and Israel with Hamas, though in the latter case, it was to provide a competitor to the secular PLO.

The British and later the US helped nurture the Muslim Brotherhood as documented in Robert Dreyfuss’ “Devils Game”.

The US provided arms and other aid to Islamic fundamentalists as long as they were fighting the Soviets but when they prevailed and eradicated the opium crop, that could not stand.

If an authoritarian could enforce order and would “do business”, it didn’t matter what they called themselves. Often, it was better than a messy democracy or a recalcitrant monarchy that actually viewed the land as their own personal possession. If they strayed off the reservation, well that had to be dealt with. If they looked like they were losing their grip, a decision had to be made whether to double down or finance/create the opposition.

lanceman wrote:When the British handed off their global empire to the US, they retained their tactic of working with anyone if it was to their geostrategic or economic benefit. The US took very good notes. The Germans did this too when they shipped Lenin back into Russia, Stalin with the Hitler-Stalin pact and Israel with Hamas, though in the latter case, it was to provide a competitor to the secular PLO.

The British and later the US helped nurture the Muslim Brotherhood as documented in Robert Dreyfuss’ “Devils Game”.

The US provided arms and other aid to Islamic fundamentalists as long as they were fighting the Soviets but when they prevailed and eradicated the opium crop, that could not stand.

If an authoritarian could enforce order and would “do business”, it didn’t matter what they called themselves. Often, it was better than a messy democracy or a recalcitrant monarchy that actually viewed the land as their own personal possession. If they strayed off the reservation, well that had to be dealt with. If they looked like they were losing their grip, a decision had to be made whether to double down or finance/create the opposition.

What he said. 

And as a side-note, British colonialism makes a surprise entry into the background of key witnesses.

Worth listening to!
Scrub halfway thru.
Doug Campbell talked about this in Nov 2019

https://www.spreaker.com/user/7338953/156-august-2-2019-a-jim-garrison-the-cla

The katamari phenomenon of QAnon (gathering up conspiracy theories throughout history into a gigantic ball of internally inconsistent counter-dogma) has been happening outside of the QAnon cult, happening with long rants about JFK and Nazis. I swear, nearly all the "connections" between the JFK case and Nazis are just restatements of 20th century history that do not actually connect the two things, they just run through a litany of suppressed history with regards to both things, which are new to most people, and let the reader's mind do the connecting. 

It's not that the individual facts are true or untrue, it's whether these disparate facts are related and form a coherent line of argument. They generally don't.

When there are Nazis in the JFK case they seem to related to the one man we know who didn't kill JFK, Oswald. During his life he seemed to associate with a lot of far right figures. I have some ideas about why that might be, but, as Oswald did not kill Kennedy, this doesn't tell us anything really about who did kill Kennedy. (Oswald also claimed to be a Communist, but nowadays hardly anyone is maintaining that a secret cabal of commies offed JFK. For some reason the Nazi angle persists instead.)

After Oswald's death an actual Nazi, Harold Keith Thompson, glommed on to Marguerite Oswald; Sharp and Albarelli note this but fail to make sense of it. And some of the earliest critics of the Warren Commission came from the far right. I'd say generally they didn't add much to the debate. If anything they detracted by associating critics of the official story with anti-semitism, the ur-conspiracy theory. In the case of Michael Collins Piper the damage they did to the truth was impressive.

I think the appeal of the idea of the murder of JFK being the triumph of fascism is undeniable, though, because emotionally, it tracks. Even if evidence-wise, it does not. People feel like a malevolent fascist force coup'd JFK. The assassination feels evil. And evil is popularly synonymous with Nazis. So Nazis did it. That's about it.

Of course, none of this is news to people on this forum.

Gerd Heideman, you now the rock-solid journo who brought us the Hitler diaries to the world back in 1983.

More than 7,000 folders of papers, more than 100,000 photographs and 700 audio tapes of interviews with Nazi leaders: it is the largest and most important private collection on the Third Reich ever acquired by a university. The Hoover Institute of Stanford University in California is purchasing the exceptional collection, it was announced on Saturday. The collection was built by an equally special and controversial collector: Gerd Heidemann, the German journalist who presented the diaries of Adolf Hitler to the world in 1983. Those diaries turned out to be false. They were made by Konrad Kujau, the man from whom Heidemann received them on behalf of the weekly Stern bought for 9.3 million marks. Gerd Heidemann (1931) lost his job and even ended up in prison.

For the past four decades, he has lived on welfare while guarding his most prized possession: the archive he built up during his career as a journalist. To prevent this collection from being dispersed through auction after his death and possibly falling into the hands of neo-Nazis, the Hoover Institute paid an undisclosed sum to bring Heidemann’s belongings to California and make them (digitally) available for scientific research. 




https://pledgetimes.com/stanford-university-buys-largest-nazi-collection-ever-from-a-controversial-owner/

Well well, at least the people can check the works of this huge collection somehow soon enough.

and the other top ten are about how the Jews killed JFK. Seems contradictory, but the Jews get blamed, eventually, for everything, from the weather to The Music Business. I have vociferously protested this crap, but seem to be getting nowhere. Anti-Semitism seems to be an acceptable prejudice.

AllenLowe wrote:and the other top ten are about how the Jews killed JFK. Seems contradictory, but the Jews get blamed, eventually, for everything, from the weather to The Music Business. I have vociferously protested this crap, but seem to be getting nowhere. Anti-Semitism seems to be an acceptable prejudice.

I see only two threads that discuss the involvement of Israel or individual Jews in the JFK assassination.

Regarding possible Israeli involvement, would JFK’s well documented efforts to press for inspection of the Israeli nuclear research to deter development of nuclear weapons be sufficient motivation? If Israel considered itself under continuous existential threat that a nuclear weapon could deter, I would say yes.

Would Israel have the means and audacity to conduct the assassination? If the accounts of Israeli targeted assassinations detailed in the book “Rise and Kill First” are true, certainly yes. While some of the killings described are up close and personal involving handguns or poisonings, some were done using remotely detonated explosive devices. There was at least one killing made by two riflemen at long distance. There was also one attempt using a captured Palestinian who had been psychologically programmed to kill a target but the book says the programmed assassin did not even attempt to kill his assigned target. Add on the brazen theft of highly enriched uranium from a privately owned Nuclear Materials Corporation facility that made nuclear fuel for US Navy submarines and the deliberate attack on the USS Liberty would also suggest that the answer is yes.

Regarding the individual (Efron) who was the focus of one of the threads, what is significant is his work under James Angleton who 1) was the CIA liaison with Israeli intelligence 2) his work on HT/LINGUAL where he monitored Oswald’s mail and 3) his presence during the Warren Commission interrogation of Marina Oswald. Would detailed knowledge of Oswald be useful to an assassination plot that sought to pin the assassination on Oswald as a lone nut? I would think so. Especially if they knew that Oswald either worked for the CIA or was trying to be recruited to work for the CIA.

Israeli intelligence often uses Jewish citizens of foreign nations in various capacities. The owner of the NUMEC plant from which the bomb grade uranium was stolen in the mid-1960s was a devout Zionist. Jack Ruby and Mickey Cohen smuggled weapons for Israel. In some cases, they just ask the citizen their passport and change the photo as was done for those involved in the assassination of the Hamas official in Dubai. Australia, in particular has been so incensed at the practice that they expelled the Israeli ambassador.

In the early 1960s, Israel did not have nearly the influence over US government policy that it did starting in the late 1960s. Part of that was political influence through lobbying organizations (Which the Kennedy Justice Dept. was trying to get registered as foreign agents). The other part of that influence was that by the late 1960s, US officials knew that Israel possessed nuclear weapons. I suspect this was due to information gathered by the USS Liberty which was why it was deliberately attacked.

While evidence pointing to Israeli involvement is circumstantial, the same can be said of the other suspects.

So if the suspects for the JFK assassination can include

Anti-Castro Cubans

Pro-Castro Cubans

Italian organized crime figures

Russians, both Red and White

Protestant Orange sympathizers

A guy that maintains a date book of apparent French or French-Canadian extraction

and an assortment of odd fellows, why should the Israeli government get an exemption?

Maybe your mother did it. We don’t want to rule anyone out asshole.

I’m not even going to entertain your idiotic non-points which happen to coincide with Neo Nazi talking points. There is tons of evidence of CIA/military involvement, zero of Jewish involvement. Fuck you and your Anti Semitic cover. Sorry Greg for using this kind of language but if this place starts getting into these kind of despicable false theories I will be out of here.

AllenLowe wrote:Maybe your mother did it. We don’t want to rule anyone out asshole.

I’m not even going to entertain your idiotic non-points which happen to coincide with Neo Nazi talking points. There is tons of evidence of CIA/military involvement, zero of Jewish involvement. Fuck you and your Anti Semitic cover. Sorry Greg for using this kind of language but if this place starts getting into these kind of despicable false theories I will be out of here.

Allen, I would expect nothing less than what you consider a principled stand.

lanceman wrote:

AllenLowe wrote:and the other top ten are about how the Jews killed JFK. Seems contradictory, but the Jews get blamed, eventually, for everything, from the weather to The Music Business. I have vociferously protested this crap, but seem to be getting nowhere. Anti-Semitism seems to be an acceptable prejudice.

I see only two threads that discuss the involvement of Israel or individual Jews in the JFK assassination.

Regarding possible Israeli involvement, would JFK’s well documented efforts to press for inspection of the Israeli nuclear research to deter development of nuclear weapons be sufficient motivation? If Israel considered itself under continuous existential threat that a nuclear weapon could deter, I would say yes.

Would Israel have the means and audacity to conduct the assassination? If the accounts of Israeli targeted assassinations detailed in the book “Rise and Kill First” are true, certainly yes. While some of the killings described are up close and personal involving handguns or poisonings, some were done using remotely detonated explosive devices. There was at least one killing made by two riflemen at long distance. There was also one attempt using a captured Palestinian who had been psychologically programmed to kill a target but the book says the programmed assassin did not even attempt to kill his assigned target. Add on the brazen theft of highly enriched uranium from a privately owned Nuclear Materials Corporation facility that made nuclear fuel for US Navy submarines and the deliberate attack on the USS Liberty would also suggest that the answer is yes.

Regarding the individual (Efron) who was the focus of one of the threads, what is significant is his work under James Angleton who 1) was the CIA liaison with Israeli intelligence 2) his work on HT/LINGUAL where he monitored Oswald’s mail and 3) his presence during the Warren Commission interrogation of Marina Oswald. Would detailed knowledge of Oswald be useful to an assassination plot that sought to pin the assassination on Oswald as a lone nut? I would think so. Especially if they knew that Oswald either worked for the CIA or was trying to be recruited to work for the CIA.

Israeli intelligence often uses Jewish citizens of foreign nations in various capacities. The owner of the NUMEC plant from which the bomb grade uranium was stolen in the mid-1960s was a devout Zionist. Jack Ruby and Mickey Cohen smuggled weapons for Israel. In some cases, they just ask the citizen their passport and change the photo as was done for those involved in the assassination of the Hamas official in Dubai. Australia, in particular has been so incensed at the practice that they expelled the Israeli ambassador.

In the early 1960s, Israel did not have nearly the influence over US government policy that it did starting in the late 1960s. Part of that was political influence through lobbying organizations (Which the Kennedy Justice Dept. was trying to get registered as foreign agents). The other part of that influence was that by the late 1960s, US officials knew that Israel possessed nuclear weapons. I suspect this was due to information gathered by the USS Liberty which was why it was deliberately attacked.

While evidence pointing to Israeli involvement is circumstantial, the same can be said of the other suspects.

So if the suspects for the JFK assassination can include

Anti-Castro Cubans

Pro-Castro Cubans

Italian organized crime figures

Russians, both Red and White

Protestant Orange sympathizers

A guy that maintains a date book of apparent French or French-Canadian extraction

and an assortment of odd fellows, why should the Israeli government get an exemption?

What you've done is just highlight the problem of conspiracy theories, regardless of who is at the center of them. Confirmation bias.

Yes, you can make a case for Israel having a motive. But after that it kind of devolves into the type of dot-connecting employed by the Ed forum Nazi hunters. That is especially apparent when it comes to allegations about Ruby running guns to Israel. 

I want to say at this point, I have no problem with a discussion on Israel or Israeli intelligence as a suspect, despite thinking it is risible. But whether the discussion is about Israel, New Zealand, Swaziland or a pack of fairy penguins packing heat seen behind the grassy knoll, what I won't tolerate is anything that could be construed as hate speech or bigotry. 

(Of course, there are always exceptions, as in the English cricket team, or the US swimming team).

An example of Ruby being used in such propaganda efforts: The FBI investigation has many many reports on people giving information on Ruby. Some of those reports are attempts by the informant to tie him to a conspiracy. These people invariably give their true motives away by referring to him as "Jack (or Jacob) Rubenstein" as a means of making sure you understand he is a Jew.

Yes, Australia did kick out an Israeli diplomat a while back because of Mossad forging Australian passports. But so did England, and possibly a couple of other countries.

It is understandable that the cold war intel agencies of the Super Powers get special attention - especially for their more underhanded and sociopathic behaviors. But the only other agency that seems to draw any attention is Mossad. Why is that, I wonder? They are no worse than the agencies of most other countries. Australia is no exception. We bugged the parliament of newly liberated East Timor in order to obtain an advantage in dividing up the spoils of oil and gas in the Timor Sea. We screwed the shit out of that country - one of the poorest on Earth by using those illegal taps.  Our agencies also set up a targeted but peaceful group to take the fall for a bombing in Sydney - and ASIO has often been nothing but a lapdog of the CIA - especially in attempting to destabilize progressive governments. So much so that in the 70s, then Attorney-General, Lionel Murphy ordered commonwealth police to raid the offices of the agency. 

If only a US Attorney-General had the guts to do that...
https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/from-the-archives-1973-police-raid-asio-headquarters-in-melbourne-20230309-p5cqtl.html

As I pointed out, the case for Israeli involvement in the JFK assassination is circumstantial as are the cases behind all the other suspects. Their conclusions are not certainties even if all the facts they are based on are true. Conversely, showing some of the facts behind circumstantial cases are doubtful or false weakens them but does not disprove them which makes them easier to make than disprove. The best that can be done is to refute the  strongest arguments to render the weight of the remaining arguments insufficient to make even a mildly plausible case. However, those that are disturbed by the consideration of Israeli involvement don’t even try to do that. Their responses are invariably accusations of antisemitism or dismissals of the idea as as being “loony”, “nutty”, “crazy” etc.

To my knowledge, the first person to inject “Jews” into the JFK assassination was … Jack Ruby himself by claiming he wanted to avoid Jews being blamed for the assassination (which as far as I know, no one was claiming).

The author of “Rise and Kill First” lists numerous assassination operations using Jewish citizens of nations other than Israel. If this increases suspicions of Jews who were not involved and who may even disapprove of such actions, who should bear the blame? Pointing out other nations that took retaliatory action against Israel for abusing passports merely shows how widespread the practice was.

If any other nation can be shown to have had a motivation to assassinate JFK, the risk/reward ratio to make it worthwhile, the operational ability and experience to have done so, then by all means, they should join Israel as potential candidates. To my mind that might include Turkey and Italy (for JFK’s removal of the Jupiter missiles as part of the resolution of the Cuban Missile Crisis) and Cuba itself (for the assassination attempts and sabotage operations conducted by the Kennedy administration as well as only a verbal promise that there would not be a US invasion). But of these, I think Cuba is by far the more likely candidate.

LM, it is barely even a circumstantial case and is based on the same bloated rhetoric, profiling and 6 degrees of separation that the Coup people are so enamored of. 

Any comments made by Ruby were under the influence of amphetamines, sleep deprivation and an all-night session with Harry Olsen. And after the event, I have little doubt he was being taunted in subtle ways by his guards in regard to "Jews".

Don't know about you, but I cannot perceive of Ruby worrying about showing that Jews have guts, without that notion being drilled into him via the likes of Hunt Propaganda on "heroism" under the above influence. 

And as for a Jewish pogrom... as I have shown in the past, there was an ongoing and national story about cancer experiments at a Jewish hospital in New York, including injection of cancer cells into patients with weakened immune systems. There was either no consent, or patients were tricked into consent. It is highly likely Ruby was aware of this. It would have been a talking point in his synagogue for a start.

It is true the topic of potential Israeli involvement is somewhat stymied by accusations of anti-Semitism. On the other-hand, it is also true that anti-Semites pushing this line do try and hide behind the "anti-Semite" counter-attack. Makes it hard to navigate a discussion where no lines are crossed by either side.

As I have already indicated, I do think the running guns for Israel line is total bullshit. And a fond talking point of actual-Anti-Semites dipping into this case. And that leads back to my original point. All such theorizing is predicated on the flimsiest of evidence sought through confirmation bias. It is no   coincidence that Piper and Guyénot were/are anti-Israel. It is no coincidence that Linda/Leslie (in US terms) is on the far left. It is no coincidence deeply paranoiac types blame abstract foes that they are unable to put names to (yes, I'm looking at you, Mr. Drago).

Here is Guyénot, at the quaintly named "Truthseeker" website https://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=245525 it is a piece on Jack being a member of the Jewish Mafia and involved in arms smuggling to Israel.

How is the case made? Proximity Jew spotting and other dubious means.

As for kicking out an Israeli diplomat, Australia was merely following England's lead. And yes, forging documents was/is a widespread practice AND ONE THAT IS MOST CERTAINLY NOT CONFINED TO MOSSAD. FFS, it is standard spy fair. They all do it.

To single out Mossad for it in order to build a JFK case is a tad disingenuous, imo, because it makes it sound like Mossad alone does it. 

I'll finish this rant by stating that in my ideal world, I would have all intelligence agencies restricted in activities, and all religions taxed with only strictly defined, bona fide charity work being exempt. Religion would also be barred from state schools and government funding of religious-based schools would cease. Lobbying of politicians would also be heavily curtailed, not least in the religious and military armaments sectors. 

FFS. 48,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.99 or whatever it is we are paying the US for maybe possibly getting a few subs at some unspecified future date just so we can have a needless alliance with them and the fucked-up Poms. 

AUKUS. It rhymes with FAUKUS.

But I digress.

If you want to start a thread on alleged Israeli involvement, go ahead. But try and marshal something a bit better than our French friend at Truthseeker and be prepared to have it put under a microscope.

What JFK assassination theory isn’t a collection of circumstantial evidence dependent to some extent on 6-degrees of separation between the players? Most theories have the perpetrators getting away unscathed but without accomplishing the changes in policies which presumably motivated the assassination. Hoffa still went to jail, Soviet nuclear warheads increased during the 1960s as the US numbers declined, there was no invasion of Cuba, the civil rights efforts accelerated. Yes, they got their war in Vietnam but it was totally fucked up.

lanceman wrote:What JFK assassination theory isn’t a collection of circumstantial evidence dependent to some extent on 6-degrees of separation between the players? Most theories have the perpetrators getting away unscathed but without accomplishing the changes in policies which presumably motivated the assassination. Hoffa still went to jail, Soviet nuclear warheads increased during the 1960s as the US numbers declined, there was no invasion of Cuba, the civil rights efforts accelerated. Yes, they got their war in Vietnam but it was totally fucked up.

Which is why conspiracy theories are almost always a waste of time and nothing but a parlor game and why I (and others here) concentrate on showing Oswald was framed as the best means of getting this case back into open status for new investigations.

Looks like Ms. Sharp has included Umbrella Man and Dark Complected Man with the Nazis.

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/29502-umbrella-man-revisited/

DCM is clearly Jay Blades from The Repair Shop tv show. His role was to collect the pistol and the rifle, take them back to the barn, then hand them over to Dom for restoration.

steely_dan wrote:DCM is clearly Jay Blades from The Repair Shop tv show. His role was to collect the pistol and the rifle, take them back to the barn, then hand them over to Dom for restoration.

 

           

steely_dan wrote:DCM is clearly Jay Blades from The Repair Shop tv show. His role was to collect the pistol and the rifle, take them back to the barn, then hand them over to Dom for restoration.