There is an excellent new article by Phil Nelson on his blog about the MK ULTRA program, which he said spawned patsies for the three cardinal assassinations of the 1960s: JFK, MLK, and RFK. 

I am going to give you the link to it, and I encourage you to read it. However, I would like to submit a couple of postscripts of my own. 

First, although Phil lumps Oswald in with the other MK-ULTRA'd patsies, you really shouldn't do it. I'm not saying that there was no psychological manipulation done to Oswald. There may have been a lot. However, there is no doubt that Oswald, unlike the other patsies, was in complete control of his faculties. He was lucid. He was clear. And he was competent to defend himself. He did a lot of damage to the plotters in the last two days of his life. And, his mental competency was so great, that they could not dare let him see a lawyer- not even once. They would have had to kill the lawyer if they had done that. In comparison, they had a lawyer for Jack Ruby right away. They set it up in advance. 

And that brings me to my second postscript. Although Oswald should NOT be lumped in with James Earl Ray, Sirhan Sirhan, and others that followed, such as Mark David Chapman, Jack Ruby should be on the list. Ruby was definitely MK-ULTRA'd. He was MK-ULTRA'd as much as any of them. They flew the CIA's "Maestro of Mind Control" Dr. Louis Joylan West from Los Angeles to Dallas to treat Ruby when he was in prison. Ruby was heavily drugged, both before and after the Oswald shooting. And he had no mental competence at all to defend himself. He did NOT shoot Oswald. He only believed that he did and accepted that he did because Dallas Police told him that he did. He had nomemory of doing it. He had no thought to do it. He did not have the slightest impulse to want to shoot Oswald. It wasn't even remotely a part of his nature. He was a devout Jew. 

So, with those caveats in mind, please read this article.

https://lbjthemasterofdeceit.com/2020/08/01/connecting-the-dots-the-three-1960s-patsy-assassins-to-cias-mk-ultra/

This is a great song from the 1960s that most will recognize if you were around then, even you don't remember the name of the band: The Guess Who, who were Canadian. It has a very distinctive rhythm.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5XPth72kso&feature=youtu.be

Returning now to Afghanistan, the Taliban issued a very clarifying statement yesterday, August 15. They said that they are not, and never have been, a threat to any foreign country, that they have never plotted or acted against any foreign country. I take that as a categorical denial that they were involved, in any way, in 9/11. And I believe them. I don't think they had anything remotely to do with 9/11. I think they were as shocked about it, when it happened, as the rest of the world.

And they denounced a remark made recently by an Afghan official that the upcoming "intra-Afghan talks" are specifically between the Taliban and the Afghan government. They said: 

The Islamic Emirate does not recognize the Kabul administration as a government but views it as western-imposed structure working for the continuation of American occupation. We only accept and have made preparations for negotiations that were described in the historic Doha agreement and those are intra-Afghan negotiations that include all parties within the Afghan community and culture. 

What that tells to me is that they are not going to negotiate with the Afghan government and with Ghani. They are going to insist that the current government be disbanded. Anyone who thinks that a coalition between the Taliban and the current government is coming is nursing a delusion. The Taliban is going to insist that all top officials in the current government leave. Lower officials who pledge allegiance to the Taliban and what they are striving for will be welcome to stay.  But, that's about it. The old government has to die and a new one started with no ties whatsoever to the occupiers. That's what they are going to say. 

The question is: Will the Taliban be inclusive enough so that the Afghan government will step aside? Will the Afghan government be willing to shutter itself in order to have peace?  Trump may have a role in this because if he cuts off all funding to the Afghan government, they will have close-up. 

But, it's going to end with a new government that has most, if not all that the Taliban wants. And it really will constitute a defeat for the United States. When it's all over, and peace is established, it will be as much a defeat for the United States as it was for the Soviet Union.  Or I could say that it will be as much a defeat for the U.S. as was the Vietnam War. There will be some talking heads who try to spin it otherwise, but other talking heads will point out that every American who died in Afghanistan died for absolutely nothing.  

I'm having a nice visit with Paul, and this time, he brought his girlfriend Monier with him, who is Iranian. And last night, in her honor, we ate at a new Mediterranean restaurant in Austin. They were open despite Covid, but there were few people there. But, the food was fantastic. I'm talking Mediterranean salads, hummus, tabouli, pita bread, and the best broasted cauliflower and very tasty eggplant. That's DiMassi's Mediterranean Buffet in South Austin.

My good friend Paul Popa is back, and we have done a song together, that soul classic from 1973, You Are The Sunshine Of My Life by Stevie Wonder.  I hope you like it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbQ-dCp5KRM&feature=youtu.be

The Assassination of FDR 

by Ralph C. Cinque 

1

I think it's very likely that Franklin Roosevelt was assassinated, and of course, that theory has been around for a long time. It started soon after his death on April 12, 1945. 

He officially died of a cerebral hemorrhage, but are you aware that he was never autopsied? 

"The doctors, seeing no real need for an autopsy, decided that it must have been a cerebral hemorrhage."

So, all the History books glibly claim that FDR died of a cerebral hemorrhage, when it's just a guess; a very convenient guess. And FDR's medical records completely disappeared after his death. Ten years later, when Eleanor Roosevelt had her own suspicions, and she went looking for his medical records, she couldn't locate them. 

And his body was rushed out of Georgia in defiance of state law that he be autopsied there. Sound familiar?  By Texas state law, JFK should have been autopsied in that state, and some of the Parkland doctors tried to stand up to the Secret Service agents about it. I wonder if they realized that those agents would have used any amount of force necessary to remove his body from Parkland Hospital. And when I say any amount, I mean including lethal force. Something similar happened in Georgia, although I don't know how tense it got. In Texas, it got very tense.

The most popular theory is that FDR was slowly poisoned with arsenic, which they put in his food. But, who did it? One popular theory is that Stalin did it. Stalin is also accused of killing General George Patton, and Bill O'Reilly wrote a book on it. But, both ideas are extremely stupid, in my opinion. 

I'm not going to go into Patton, but it is absolutely insane to think that Stalin killed FDR. Do you know what FDR did for Stalin? He sent him guns, ammunition, bombs, tanks, and even planes. That's right. He sent Stalin all the parts needed to build planes. He also sent him tons of food to feed the Soviet Army and tons of fiber to make uniforms, blankets, etc. He also conceded to him all of Eastern Europe. 

Now, why would Stalin want to kill the guy who did all that for him? He wouldn't. He couldn't. He didn't. And there is something else to consider: Anyone who contemplates killing a President has got to know that someone is going to take his place. And so the question becomes: will his successor be better or worse for the perpetrator than the guy he's contemplating killing? And in this case, there is no way that Stalin could have thought that Truman would have been better for him than FDR. Nobody could have been better for him than FDR. Truman was a machine politician, the ultimate team player. He did what he was told. The situation was such that Stalin would have sent elixirs to FDR- not poisons. 

And, it is a historical fact that Stalin was one of the first people to claim that FDR was murdered. He even wrote to Eleanor Roosevelt about it. Now, why would a guy who murdered somebody that the whole world accepted had died of natural causes propose that he was murdered?  In other words, why would a guy who got away with murder, start rocking the boat and talking up murder?  

So, who did Stalin say killed FDR?  He said Churchill did it. And I wouldn't put anything past Churchill. He was a dastardly man; a pathological liar; a eugenicist before Nazi Eugenics got started; and a war criminal. Churchill's whole, entire strategy for fighting World War II was: to kill German civilians. Kill as many of them as possible. Target women and children, etc. If any leader today fought a war the way Churchill fought World War II, he would be dragged into The Hague and prosecuted for war crimes. And I am not saying that rhetorically or facetiously; I really mean it; he really would be. But no, there is no way Churchill did it. He may have been involved in some way, it's possible; but the idea that he just independently and single-handedly killed FDR is ridiculous. Look: no matter who killed FDR, the cover-up was done here and by us. It was done by Americans who were in control immediately after his death. And it included agencies and institutions of the U.S. government which went along with the official story of his death, just as they went along with the official story of JFK's death. THEY are the ones who killed FDR. You should never think for a second that the assassination of a U.S. President can be anything but homegrown. 

So, who killed FDR? Well, who wanted him dead? Who stood to gain? And what did they gain? 

We're opening a hornet's nest here, and this is going to take a while.  It will be fun, at least for me, because I think it's very interesting. But, I'll leave you with something to think about in the form of a question. And the question is:  When did the Cold War begin? Or to rephrase: What exact day is the most reasonable designation of when the Cold War between the US and the USSR began? I'm looking for an exact calendar day, and I'll tell you what it is in the next installment. Stay tuned. Meantime: here are Uncle Joe and his greatest benefactor. 

 

There have been increasing calls to pay black Americans reparations for the enslavement of their ancestors, and today, Joe Biden said that, if elected, he will appoint a commission to explore the idea. 

Well, if we're going to do that, what about the Native Americans? We decimated them. We decimated their food supply, the buffalo, so that the ones we didn't kill outright would starve. We stole their land. And when we told them to move west, where we would leave them alone, we eventually decided that we wanted that land too. So, it was reservation time for them. 

We are a funny country. I mean the way we live in a delusional world where we think that the government can conjure up any amount of money out of nothing. You see: the government actually doesn't have any money. All it has are debts. But, they do have a printing press. So, they can print any amount of money that they want and for any reason they want it, whether it's to fight a war, build a bridge to nowhere, or pass money out even if  they have to drop it from helicopters. 

But, the reality is that you can no more create money from nothing, by snapping your fingers, than you create anything by snapping your fingers, such as: gold, apples, or corn. And when the reality of that sinks in, then all the money they have created is going to revert to its intrinsic value, which is nothing. 

How much longer can they keep doing what they're doing before that happens? I am not going to hazard a guess, but I do know that they can't keep doing what they're doing forever. The music is going to stop. And when it does: Heaven help us.