Conspiracy between Lincoln and JFK, page 2
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times


reply posted on 17-11-2005 @ 02:32 PM by xFalconx

It's odd that after Reagan mentioned his promise to expose the secret socities, bush sr became his vice president. Reagan would of never done that if he wasn't threatened w/ his life. Reagan mentioned later on he was threatened w/ his life.

Yeah, he even vowed that Bush would never be his Vice President. Then he was. Also, lets not forget that there was an assassination attempt on Reagan. The gunman would have killed him if he aimed just a bit higher.

It is plainly obvious, when you look at it, that the cabal is more than willing to knock off a problematic president. Think about this. Kennedy signed an order wanting to pull out of Vietnam by 1965. He also rejected Operation Northwoods, a plan to stage terrorist attacks against American citizens and blame it on Cuba to justify an invasion. And yes, he did want to get rid of the Federal Reserve. Kennedy was basically a good guy who thought that he lived in a republic. He figured out the truth on November 22, 1963. The president is merely a puppet. They get him into office, if he has the right connections, and then manipulate him into putting a public face on their agenda. If he steps out of line and stays loyal to the American people, he's killed and a more obedient puppet gets into office.

I think most of the similarities between the two deaths are coincidence, however, the manipulators may have published the fradulent Warren Report with Lincoln in mind. As far as I can tell, in truth, Lee Harvey Oswald did nothing and Kennedy was caught in the middle of a six-man mafia hit squad, contracted by the CIA. Oswald was just a patsy who was to be knocked off by Jack Ruby. No trial. No serious investigation. Typical of covert CIA Coup de etas.


reply posted on 25-1-2006 @ 12:44 AM by SpecAgentDW
It might be somewhat unrelated but I think that a way to understand an assasination (might have misspelled that, terrible with typing) is to research the individuals actions leading up to it.

"When in the course of human events" by Douglas Adams is a wonderfull must read book for anyone to understand why the War Between the States really occured. Lincoln had a definite Federalist agenda going into the war and had a lot of New England and North Western industrialists backing his war of conquest against the South. Then he ticked them off by issuing the Emancipation Proclomation.

Even though it was a measure to keep the Europeans out of the war and to give a false moral pretext to the war, the Proclomation inscensed many leading politicians and industrialists who heretofore had supported Lincoln. In "The REal Lincoln" by Thomas DiLorenzo he states a statistic of nealry 250,000 Federal troops deserting and some fleeing to Canada to protest the Proclomation! In Glory Road by Bruce Catton he sheds light on the little known rebellion in Illinois involving the Knights of the GOlden Circle, the true forerunners of the KKK. (Many of the Knights were Federal soldiers who had recently deserted because fo the Proclomation despite valiant prior service.) Anti-black sentiment was actually worse in the North than the South.

As far as JFK goes, I think that Crossfire by Jim Marrs and the Oliver Stone movie pretty well give some idea as to the mood of the administration after the bungled Bay of Pigs.


reply posted on 7-8-2006 @ 12:59 AM by TheBorg
Originally posted by D_Emissary56
The reason I mentioned the Vietnam issue above (what the heck do the CFR cronies have to do with the money?) is that these conflicts generate enormous amounts of money for the money cabals and those associated with them.

So, moral of the story....what happens to people with enough power or influence that get in the way of those with even more power?..............Bad things Man!



Well, if one looks at the CFR's website,
www.cfr.org..., they see the following quote:


The Council on Foreign Relations was founded in 1921 by businessmen, bankers, and lawyers determined to keep the United States engaged in the world.


So, to answer your question about what do they have to do with the money, I answer with the only fact that I know. By their own admission, they're the ones WITH THE MONEY!!

Something else I found that was funny on that same page are the following two quotes. Tell me what sounds bizarre about them.


The Council is an independent membership organization and a nonpartisan think tank and publisher, with headquarters in New York, offices in Washington, D.C., and programs nationwide. It has no affiliation with the U.S. government or any other government.



What does the Council do?
The Council’s main activities, as summarized in our Mission Statement:

* Convene meetings in New York, Washington, and in other select American and, occasionally, foreign cities where senior government officials, global leaders, and prominent thinkers come together with Council members to debate and discuss the major foreign policy issues of our time;



Now, after having read those two quotes, does anything glaringly obvious stand out about them? Let me know if you notice.

TheBorg
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>    ^^TOP^^



DEA is Investigating Montana State Legislators Over State Laws
  Posted 11 days ago with 59 member flags
The CIA in Australia: America\'s Foreign Watergate
  Posted 0 days ago with 12 member flags
Who is really behind the birthers and what is their real motive?
  Posted 10 days ago with 11 member flags
ESF and Black op funding.
  Posted 9 days ago with 11 member flags
There is NO Media Bias in America
  Posted 9 days ago with 10 member flags

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Anonymous hacks CIA
  Breaking Alternative News, Posted 17 hours ago, 120 replies
Free Psychic Readings
  General Chit Chat, Posted 13 hours ago, 103 replies
Hollow Earth Theory New Evidence.
  General Conspiracies, Posted 11 hours ago, 66 replies
Anonymous show your face!
  Rant, Posted 7 hours ago, 61 replies
Free will
  Philosophy and Metaphysics, Posted 15 hours ago, 50 replies