By Aaron Kesel
Former independent Black Ops Contractor Robert “Cody” Snodgres took to the airwaves early last month to allege he was offered a massive $1 million dollar paycheck from the CIA to bomb the Alfred P. Murrah Building in Oklahoma City prior to the mysterious deadly explosion in the 1990s, hours later he was in a serious car accident according to reports.
The 1990s’ 9/11, so to speak, where evidence doesn’t add up was originally and officially blamed on fertilizer bombs perpetrated by Timothy McVeigh and his accomplice Terry L. Nichols. It’s a weaved web of deceit; the investigation was a cover-up in every sense of the word, and may finally get wings for exposure.
The question is why if there is nothing to hide? That question may finally be answered with Snodgres, a career Independent Contractor. Further false flag attacks may be prevented with his stepping forward to blow the whistle on how ICs are approached to carry out these heinous acts against the American people in exchange for large sums of cash. According to Snodgres, he believes McVeigh and Nichols were patsies. (And as you will see later evidence collaborates this assertion.) Snodgres told Jeff Rense:
For over 20 years, I was an Independent Contractor (IC), specializing in sensitive, covert assignments, as well as bodyguard work. In 1994 I was given the task to blow up the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City. This job came from an x-US military man, who told me he worked covertly for CIA. I refused on moral grounds. My strong opposition to attacking U.S. citizens on our own soil changed my status from a CIA asset into a liability, a private, Independent Contractor who ‘knew too much,’
Snodgres appeared on Jeff Rense’s radio show on December 4th and 5th, giving his shocking testimony stating he refused the offer to blow up the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building.
Ironically, hours after Snodgres did the December 5th interview he was in a near-fatal car accident.
Snodgres left an audio message after the crash with further details on the incident.
Further, Snodgres discussed both the Clintons and Bushes involvement in drug trafficking, Iran Contra, and numerous other corruption by the federal government including 9/11 which he said was “obvious.”
This wouldn’t be the first time that someone connected to OKC or looking into it had an accident.
Several mysterious torturous deaths followed others in the story of the Oklahoma City bombing, something that has the markings of a deep state black intelligence operation (false flag attack).
Terrance Yeakey was one of the first responders at the scene after the OKC incident and may have seen the explosive devices that the news reported that day.
Terrance Yeakey’s ex-wife Tonia stated on radio program AM1300 KAKC in 1998 that her husband was killed, with his death framed to look like a suicide only days before receiving the police department’s Medal of Valor for his heroic rescue efforts that day.
On May 11, 1996, only days after Yeakey’s death, the New York Times ran a story with the headline – “A Policeman Who Rescued 4 in Bombing Kills Himself.” But the bold assertion that Sgt. Terrance Yeakey killed himself couldn’t be further from the actual truth.
Sgt. Yeakey’s body was found in a field in El Reno, OK, over a mile away from his abandoned vehicle. There was an extremely large amount of blood found in his vehicle; he had been bound, had rope burn on his neck, ligature marks on his wrists, numerous deep cuts, likely tortured and killed execution-style with a single bullet that entered his right temple at a 45-degree angle. To top everything off, no gun was found at the scene of his death until an FBI agent showed up and suspiciously found a gun in an already thoroughly searched area within just a mere 5 minutes after being there. Yet somehow his death was ruled a “suicide.”
Tonia Yeakey, alleges that her husband witnessed things during his response to the bombing which did not agree with the ‘official version’ of events being put forward by law enforcement and the mainstream media at that time, and he began collecting evidence to support his findings when he was brutally murdered.
Another man who had an untimely death is Kenneth Trentadue who was being held in a suicide-proof cell when he suddenly committed “suicide” by hanging.
(PHOTOS OF HIS DEAD BODY WARNING EXTREMELY GRAPHIC)
Timothy McVeigh stated that he believed Trentadue was mistaken for Richard Lee Guthrie Jr., a suspected co-conspirator in the bombing who was also found dead from hanging. Guthrie was a member of the Midwest bank robbery gang.
But the mysterious hanging deaths don’t end there. A third person, witness Alden Gillis Baker, a month before the trial was to start in 2000, was also found hanging in his cell.
Then there is the death of videographer Norman Perle who suddenly had a heart attack a month after telling Kenneth Trentadue’s brother Jesse that surveillance tapes had been erased.
Terry Nichols, like Robert Snodgres, stated a similar shocking allegation in a 19-page signed declaration asserting that the whole bombing plot was an FBI operation and that McVeigh let it slip during a spout of anger that he was taking instruction from former FBI official Larry Potts.
Nichols claimed that, in December 1992, McVeigh told him that “while he was serving in the U.S. Army, he had been recruited to carry out undercover missions.”
Who was Larry Potts?
Potts was the lead FBI agent at Idaho, Ruby Ridge in 1992, which led to the shooting death of Vicki Weaver, the wife of separatist Randy Weaver. He was also reportedly involved in the 51-day siege in Waco, Texas in 1993, which resulted in a fire that killed 81 Branch Davidian followers.
In 1995, one month after the Oklahoma City Bombing, Potts was promoted to the bureau’s Deputy Director by then FBI Director Louis J. Freeh.
Potts was then demoted months later in July, 1995 after there was intense pressure and criticism for the cover-up of an order to allow agents to shoot anyone seen leaving the Weaver cabin at Ruby Ridge. It was also alleged that he had helped destroy documents, according to the New York Times. (archived)
So Potts very well could have had a hand in the OKC bombing whether deliberately or as an entrapment operation gone horribly wrong. Although the claims by Snodgres don’t mention Potts, he did mention that he was set up to be a patsy himself.
After that accusation by Nichols was made public by Jesse Trentadue, former FBI Terrorist Task Force director Danny Coulson called to reopen the investigation and named German intelligence agent Andreas Strassmeier as potentially involved, BBC reported.
Interestingly, Timothy McVeigh worked for the CIA as a drug smuggler and assassin prior to deciding to blow up the Murrah Building. So, to say the least, he was very connected to military intelligence like Snodgres. In a letter to his sister in the New York Times that is often overlooked, McVeigh mentions the covert operations that he was a part of. (archived)
Later in 2010, it was found that the CIA collaborated with the U.S. Justice Department in the prosecution of convicted Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh after Jesse Trentadue sued the CIA with a FOIA request trying to get information on his brother’s death. He received 37 blank pages, 12 documents altogether, all stamped Secret, or National Security, Antiwar reported.
Further, other documents released under the Freedom of Information Act later confirmed that the FBI received a phone call the day before the Oklahoma City bombing warning that the attack was imminent, and that the feds tried to reach a deal with bomber Terry Nichols to take the death penalty off the table if he admitted making the call.
It is factually documentable that the CIA or elements of (deep state) have planned several false flag attacks throughout history at the peril of the American people, most notably the infamous Gulf Of Tonkin incident, falsified evidence of WMDs and Operation Northwoods. But recently it was also disclosed through the National Archive JFK files that the CIA suggested a third false flag attack, this time blaming the Soviets to start a war with Russia, Newsweek reported.
Additionally, there is the fact that majority of terrorist plots including the first bombing of the World Trade Center were set up by the FBI to either get information out of someone or to ensure job security by stopping terrorist plots planned by the FBI, as this New York Times article documents. (archived)
So was the bombing of the Murrah Building, which injured 700 people and killed 168, including 19 children, also a false flag attack against the American people as former FBI LA Head Ted L. Gunderson suggested? According to Gunderson in his speech, he said that CIA Michael Riconosciuto examined seismic graphs and found that it was an advanced bomb and not homemade.
The Oklahoma City Police Department reported 324 buildings damaged including 10 structures collapsed and 13 condemned, 86 cars burned or destroyed, and an estimated 50,000 people evacuated from the downtown area.
Gunderson wasn’t the only government official to challenge the official narrative of the Oklahoma City federal building bombing. In the 1990s a U.S. Airforce Brigadier General K. Partin also expressed that the facts didn’t add up surrounding the building’s explosion.
Partin revealed in a scientific analysis that core columns were blown out from within the building and the extensive damage to the Alfred P. Murrah Building was completely inconsistent with the explanation of a truck filled with fertilizer bombs.
Snodgres said he waited for Hillary Clinton to be removed from U.S. politics before coming forward with the shocking allegations.
Today, the Oklahoma City National Memorial stands where the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building once stood. The memorial includes 168 empty chairs made of glass, bronze, and stone, each inscribed with the names of the people killed on April 19, 1995.
You can listen to the full 2 bombshell interviews below:
Aaron Kesel writes for Activist Post. Support us at Patreon. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Steemit, and BitChute. Ready for solutions? Subscribe to our premium newsletter Counter Markets.
Was a scan for radioactivity done after the Murray Bldg destruction ?
Perhaps not with mini nukes not fully developed as yet but the local MSM reported that the blast site was cleared of everyone twice when un-exploded demolition charges were found at the site.
I lost trust in this article when it falsely stated that the Gulf of Tonkin was a CIA false flag event. In fact, the attak of August 4 did not take place: “There was not a second attack on U.S. Navy ships in the Tonkin Gulf in early August 1964. Furthermore, the evidence suggests a disturbing and deliberate attempt by Secretary of Defense McNamara to distort the evidence and mislead Congress.”
https://www.usni.org/magazines/navalhistory/2008-02/truth-about-tonkin
I do not doubt the CIA has undertaken false flag attacks, but it does not help the cause of truth when an article engages in fake news.
Historynet.com reports this information comes from previously classified documents: “In late 2007, that information was finally made public when an official National Security Agency (NSA) history of signals intelligence (SIGINT) in Vietnam, written in 2002, was released in response to a Freedom of Information Act request. ”
There is NO evidence the CIA was involved in this deception.
I stated “CIA or elements of the Deep state” included in that sentence, research what deep state is it includes more than the CIA. The article is well cited. Good try though.
Are you trying to say that only a few elements within the Johnson administration staged the false reporting of the falsely fabricated attack and that other elements, such as the CIA, within that administration would have been taken by surprise by this event? How naive. The CIA’s number one axiom is that nothing takes place without iron clad plausible deniability being in place first. According to your methodology the CIA were not involved in the JFK-RFK-MLK and many other assassinations because there is no publicly identified evidences. The CIA says their check made out to you is in the mail….
You are dead wrong: I am presenting no methodology but the fact that the decision to escalate the War on Vietnam was made by McNamara and Johnson, who clearly were quite visible. The
CIA was involved in assassinating JFK/RFK and MLK an d dozens of others but the Gulf of Tonkin was not, as the article states, a false flag attack by the CIA because on August 4, there was no attack.
You insults are both ugly and off target. They also smack of criminal libel. Do YOU think the CIA attacked the US on August 4 and blamed it on North Vietnam? You are probably paid by the CIA to make absurd claims to poison the well of legitimate conspiracy allegations.
My view is founded on the formerly classified but now released documents about the Gulf of Tonkin, which was not a false flag attack but rather a non-attack.
You are correct that no actual attack took place, so technically there was no false-flag attack. It was a lie made up out of whole cloth.
The article itself contains several errors in terminology (“seismic graphs” instead of “seismographs”) and misspelled names (Michael Riconosciuto’s last name is spelled (“Riconisuto”), as well as “independent contractor” being capitalized as if one could receive an undergraduate degree in it.
Such things do little to inspire reader confidence, to say the least.
– depends on the reader. Folk who consider blogs on the internet to be an exercise in English class are few and far between.
If you think language is a little plaything you should start a search committee for another language.
So you are saying that the decision to escalate the war against Vietnam was the sole responsibility of McNamara-joint chiefs and Johnson and that the CIA et al,, while up to their necks in the Cold War, had no knowledge of and took no part in this false flag event. I call the Tonkin event a false flag because the non event was blamed on the ‘enemy’ just as if it had happened. The best false flag being a hoax false flag as often witnessed today in current events.
Any personnel as representing their agency within government who had privy to the knowledge that the Tonkin event was to be a false flag and did not raise a voice in concern or against such a conspiracy must under law, silence being consent, be considered as a corespondent to the actions taken. As the CIA was actively conducting Operation Mockingbird at that time they must be considered at the very least as a consenting if not an active participant to the Tonkin event. Therefore CIA is not blameless as you insist, despite the CIA always having plausible deniability which is their hallmark modus operandi. Wars, for certain governmental agencies and for involved corporate interests, are a blessing were in these governmental agencies get to do their thing, increase their budgets, size and importance and experimentation of new weapons and means of conducting war in cahoots with their corporate accomplices. I suggest that the CIA had as much interest in seeing the Tonkin incident being a successful ploy as the military, state department, executive branch and private for profit corporations surrounding POTUS in seeing the expansion of this war.
Your splitting hairs in defense of the CIA seems a bias in the CIA’s favor, almost like plausible deniability.
I am telling you what the released archives reveal:
1) ” “I (Commander Stockdale in a plane) had the best seat in the house to watch that event and our destroyers were just shooting at phantom targets—there were no PT boats there . . . there was nothing there but black water and American firepower.Captain Herrick also began to have doubts about the attack. As the battle continued, he realized the “attacks” were actually the results of “overeager sonar operators” and poor equipment performance. The Turner Joy had not detected any torpedoes during the entire encounter, and Herrick determined that the Maddox ‘s operators were probably hearing the ship’s propellers reflecting off her rudder during sharp turns. 12 The destroyer’s main gun director was never able to lock onto any targets because, as the operator surmised, the radar was detecting the stormy sea’s wave tops.”
2. So the information that it was NOT an attack was established at the time but Herrick changed his story….and so
3. “McNamara considered the report, coupled with Admiral Sharp’s belief the attack was authentic, as conclusive proof. At 2336, President Johnson appeared on national television and announced his intent to retaliate against North Vietnamese targets.”
There is zero evidence in the released archives or the Navy article published in 2008 based on the archives, that the CIA was involved. A false flag attack requires an attack. What happened here is that the truth got mangled and within hours, LBJ asked for authorization to use military force. The CIA, for all its crimes, was not involved. https://www.usni.org/magazines/navalhistory/2008-02/truth-about-tonkin#footnotes
Trump’s attack on a Syrian airfield is similar: he executed an act of war (in fact, a war crime, based on international law) based on unverified reports. Like LBJ, he did not wait to find out what really happened.
Trump has repeated this knee-jerk reaction in supporting the protesters in Iran without knowing what is really going on.
I am not defending the CIA which I have written about as rogue and illegal force for evil but simply pointing out that in this situation, they were not involved. I am not splitting hairs; I am reporting the facts as they have been revealed in released archives.
I suggest you calm down and seek out evidence the CIA was involved.
Your claim of a false flag attack cannot be defended since the attack was a “ghost attack.” It was a horrible reaction by McNamara and LBJ before getting the full story, no doubt because they wanted to exploit the situation to escalate US presence in Vietnam, after LBJ had rescinded JFK’s directive to withdraw US troops from Vietnam.
The CIA may have been happy to see an escalation of the war but there is zero evidence they caused it.
“Reporting the facts as they were revealed” is akin to taking the revealing authority’s word as gospel. There is hardly any culpable evidence ever established against the CIA except where they deem any such revelations as unactionable water under the bridge. Again just because there is no public evidence of active participation does not mean the public should assume complete and unadulterated innocence as you are want to believe.
The Tonkin event was used as a false flag propaganda event, the only difference from the strict definition being that a self attack was transmuted to a fake attack. Split hairs as you want to. Your assuming that Washington jumped to conclusions and actions was because of faulty INTELLIGENCE, that for some unknown reason was not reassessed begs us to believe that Washington did not use this fake provocation as a propaganda ploy to get the public’s manufactured consensus to escalate the war; as in “Are boys are floating in the sea” as according to some of the then Main Stream Mockingbird press. The whole event was a propaganda ploy of the highest order despite what the authorities may wish to tell you. Eyes wide open….no fear.
These were not “propaganda facts” but classified documents about the actual communications.
Your counterargument is simple denial without a shred of evidence or sources.
I think I made it clear that McNamara and LBJ used the confused communications documented in the released archives to create a pretext for escalation.
My point is simple: the release classified communications show LBJ jumping to ask for war authorization within hours of the false reports…and there is no evidence or need to assume the CIA was needed. Sufficient the evil unto the day.
You provide no sources, no documentation, no evidence….just denial and repeating claims about the CIA and how the false information was use by Mc and LBJ as a pretext that I have already stated.
Just as Bush took contradictory claims of WMD by Iraq and discarded the dissenting views and cautions to create an argument for war so did McNamara and LBJ.
You are beating a dead horse, my friend. you are in denial not because it matters at this point who was responsible for the escalation, but because your denial has been refuted by released classified material which shows precisely how the White House took up one side of a confused message and ran with it because it wanted a pretext for wider war.
The CIA is an evil organization but it is not responsible for every decision ever made. Witness the dissenting views in its intelligence report to Bush and its finding, later, that Saddam had no WMD program. Sometimes they lie, sometimes they tell the truth and sometimes Presidents lie about them so they can blame failures on “bad intelligence.” Critical minds no more believe the CIA always lies as that it always tells the truth. The evidence points to Johnson exploiting the information he got in order to justify escalating the War. The information did NOT come thru the CIA but rather regular military channels.
If you have evidence the formerly classified material has been misrepresented or is fake, present that evidence. Otherwise you denial cannot be taken seriously.
We will have to agree to disagree but to take your viewpoint that only what the rulers wish to reveal is the whole unmanipulated and unadulterated truth as shown in a perhaps limited hangout of declassified documents is rather naive. There are powers of control far in excess of POTUS
Of course your accusation that I cannot produce documents is testament that the only documents that are revealed are at the government’s et al pleasure and the public’s non ability to dig through any files and other communications they might wish to in search of truth. I believe that the Tonkin event was staged and was not mere happenstance that was seized upon as a lucky segue.
“The state exists to enforce the dominance of elites, everything else is propaganda, misdirection and obfuscation.”
All the principles are dead. The release communications are a threat to no one living. The claim that the government does not release documentations which point to past crimes is false. Your overgeneralized paranoia blinds you to the details which are required to understand history.
When the CIA pointed out in its intelligence report to Bush that there were dissenting views and their did NOT have firm evidence of an active WMD program, do you disbelieve them? When they later reported that Saddam had NO active WMD program, did you disbelieve them because they “always lie?”
If today they say We didn’t do it but tomorrow admit they did, are they lying in both cases? You have no evidence and your justification is that there is no evidence the state will archive. You are wrong. Why is the FBI still refusing to release the archives on the JFK assassination? When classified material is kept secret for long periods, it is almost certain it is because it DOES contain damaging material.
In this particular case the truth was withheld for over 40 years and finally released.
That you do not believe it means you do not believe the state when it says Yes or when it says no, and that, sir is illogical.
My original point was to point out the absurdity claimed in the article about a CIA false flag attack, pointing out there was no attack. I have provided my evidence, recently released classified communications, you have provided as evidence the claim that the government never tells the truth, even when it contradicts itself.
I repeat: to believe the state never tells the truth is as absurd as that it always tells the truth. Believing this absurdity absolves you of the need to do research and exercise critical thinking skills. Whatever the state says (yes today, no tomorrow) is automatically, thought-free, false. And that is a logical fallacy.
You mentioned that you believe the CIA was involved in the political assassinations of JFK-RFK-MLK and many others but under your criteria there is no documentary proof issued by the authorities or anyone else, only supposition. You can’t have it both ways in a pick and choose of standards of proof.
By the way Saddam had WMD. Several warehouses were found to contain American made gas canisters and gas munitions, left over from supplies to Iraq from the war against Iran, but this was kept very quite and only came to light through leaks by the US military personnel involved in removing them….for which there will be no documentation. There was also the removal of many ‘gold colored painted bricks of wood’ that is not documented while vacuum packed pallets of Federal Reserve Notes disappeared in the opposite direction for which there is only supposition. Your thesis that there were contradictory opinions on Saddam having WMD, to which I agree, proves that when it comes to opinions on evidence making or breaking decisions at the highest level, those opinions carry very little weight,(as per the Tonkin event) senor administrators over ruled those below them by ignoring what they had/have to say. Your view of how the highest levels of government and its shadow members work is again naive.
Of course the state archives but public access is verboten until the authorities deem it completely safe for disclosure and who says besides yourself that what these proven liars disclose even approximates the truth. However some evidentiary files have been destroyed on occasion. The Murrah building held files of investigation against Bill Clinton and WTC Building 7 contained all the files of all the investigating agencies into bank malfeasance surrounding the 2008 financial crash. None were recovered.
I still maintain that the CIA was in the loop of knowledge on the Tonkin event and assisted the other government departments in pulling off this hoax false flag event by keeping the knowledge of the true nature of this event under wraps at that time and using their Mockingbird operation to spread a false narrative to the public in the aftermath of that event and by doing so were willing co conspirators. You can and will believe what you want to and your bantering on the true nature.of history is limited to what the authorities decide that nature will be and what the public will be issued as documentary proof. If not for the unproven allegations of investigative journalists and by your criteria of proof the Warren, 9/11 Commissions would stand as the official history of these events. This let alone the declaration of a national emergency and the instigation of the state secrets Continuity of Government Act by V.P. Cheney on 9/11/2001 and re declared before sunset ever since.This Act is purported to suspend the American Constitution in whole or part but being classified legislation you and the public are not privy to know which if any parts are in abeyance as we write each other. For Americans does it get any bigger than this?
Your beating of this point on what has been revealed in documents by the very authorities with vested interests in what knowledge is to be made available to the public borders on the very naive.
“History would be wonderful if only it were true.”
There are many books which document CIA involvement in the murder of JFK. The last I read was Mary’s Mosaic.
” If not for the unproven allegations of invest igative journalists and by your criteria of proof the Warren, 9/11 Commissions would stand as the official history of these events.” This is incorrect and shows your ignorance of the situation.
The Church Committee found a conspiracy in the assassination of JFK, and found many faults with the Warren Commission.
“The Committee published 14 volumes of reports on a variety of activities in 1975 and 1976. These included the FBI’s CointelPro program to infiltrate and disrupt domestic organizations, mail opening programs by the FBI and CIA, abuses by the Internal Revenue Service, and much more.
The Church Committee also conducted a limited investigation of the Kennedy assassination, focusing on how well the FBI and CIA supported the Warren Commission. This short report sharply faulted those agencies, stating that the Committee “developed evidence which impeaches the process by which the intelligence agencies arrived at their own conclusions about the assassination, and by which they provided information to the Warren Commission. This evidence indicates that the investigation of the assassination was deficient.”
The book is opinion not your revered government documentation.
While the Church investigation uncovered or should I say made public many aspects of the CIA’s operations, for all the good it has done, it did not find that the CIA was either directly or indirectly involved in the JFK assassination which you wrote that you believed they were. To turn the tables prove the CIA was involved. Or did the CIA just propagandize, misdirect and obfuscate the official Warren Commission, pulling the wool over that august body’s [sic] collective eyes. With your standards you must believe the Church Committee’s findings and declare the CIA had no part in that event but merely acted in stonewalling et al for some reason that that Committee somehow overlooked to fully investigate. What a shame that the Church Committee somehow left these questions unanswered as to why the CIA had acted as they did. Perhaps outside influences stopped the committees investigation short, leaving the documentation of the findings incomplete. The Church Committee went as far as they were allowed to and even slightly beyond but not all the way so the truth of things was also never complete.
Your trust in the statements of known liars is considered exemplary in some quarters.
Peter Yanney, who knew the people involved including his own father, a CIA operative, spent 16 years investigating the murder of JFK and Mary Pinchot. You are not qualified to dismiss a book as opinion which you have not read.
Is the book government documented ‘fact’ or is it the work of investigative journalism? I’m not dismissing the book, it is probably very insightful, but have been trying to point out that one man’s truth may not be another’s.
In our discussion you would have everyone believe that the authorities are telling the truth on this occasion, fibbing here or stating big black lies over there, all according to the judgement of Dale Ruff as you waffle back and forth between what you consider to be the truth and what you consider to be valid evidence of it. This is the core aspect of our discussion which I have proven by your responses, beginning with your assertion that the CIA is to be totally absolved of any participation in the Gulf of Tonkin hoax false flag event because of government authorized documentation not mentioning that the CIA, which is also an organized crime syndicate, of playing a role in those machinations. Your assertions places you on a truth high horse with no saddle as it jumps around at your command.
But you and only you can tell the truth from fabrications. This according to you and your assumptions. Sorry not buying what your selling as who the hell except those involved know where an approximation of the truth lays and even they may get some of it wrong. That is if they care to tell the truth and not give a version of it on a scale from being totally honest to a total pack of lies. Now add in POWERFUL special interests with dark motives and far reaching plans and a public to be brought along..
“The truth is such an important commodity in war that she must always be accompanied by a body guard of lies.”
I cannot discuss a book with you you have not read. Peter Yanney spent 16 years and risked his life to write this book. In it he exposes the operations of the CIA including his own father’s participation in the murder of JFK’ visionary lover Mary Pinchot, who was divorced from another CIA operative who was involved.
I just finished Reckless Youth: JFK (800 pages and thousands of footnotes). Blanket statements are dogma….I urge you to read the released archives on the Gulf of Tonkin, the Naval study which exposes the myths about the episode, and some of the excellent books about the murder of JFK. It is absurd to discuss stuff you haven’t read, even more absurd to dismiss it.
Who read it to you? If you say you did, that is just yet another lie.
Your assuming again. I have delved deeply into the Tonkin event and read a few hypotheses on the assassination of JFK. Back at you with “The CIA As Organized Crime – How Illegal Operations Corrupt America and the World” By Douglas Valentine.
You probably think that the CIA was no where to be seen in S.E. Asia before the Tonkin event, besides other even greater forces at play to which the CIA is servant to, all part of a larger world spanning business plan controlled from above POTUS.
I believe you are currently on a “graduated animal farm” that I formally inhabited. Best of luck in attaining the next level. You might want to try a more skeptical philosophical mindset when approaching and making assumptions on proposed truths. It is what clued me into your original iron clad statement on CIA non involvement in the Tonkin event instead of just giving an opinion based on the sources you take as gospel, just as my counter arguments are my opinion, each and every one I could footnote with a source. But who and what these sources might really represent are open to opinion just as your’s are.
At least we are both truth seekers, far too many are not..
I am reporting what the communications in the released classified documents reveal. LBJ announced his call to escalate the same day as the alleged attacks. He immediately exploited the confused communications while disregarding the information suggesting the attacks were only imagined.
If it were up to me, I would disband the CIA, release all their secret archives, and press charges. Your absurd libel is beyond belief.
You Funny.haha
If Justice chase the Constitutional objectives,U.S I would shine like a star.
This was a well written article, and normally the cop who was murdered isn’t talked about or well known. Not surprising that there are a few government trolls trying to discredit this article.
The most obvious tact of the troll is to call anyone who disagrees a troll.
Pick details to argue over…Trolling 101 lmao! Exposure, dale, exposure, you are exposed.