On May 7, 7:28=A0pm, "Jas" <jste...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Yikes, you should read "Reclaiming History." Looks like you need a bit
> more balanced perspective of Scott's writings :>)
>
> Another thing that really cracks me up with conspiracists is that Vince
> Bugliosi writes the ultimate Kennedy assassination book, and the
> conspiracists either only attack him and the book after reading it (or
> not), or completely dismiss it as someone with an LN agenda.
>
> If someone were raised in a complete void and had never heard of the
> Kennedy assassination and its conspiracies, all they would have to do to
> educate themselves is read and study only his book, and that's it.
They'd
> know all there is to know not only about the facts of the case -- in
depth=
> -- but also the conspiracy viewpoints, and how they can all be shot
down.
>
> I'm curious as to why some conspiracists, if they really wanted to know
> about and study the assassination -- really research it -- are not
> flocking to the bookstores and the web to get their copies of
"Reclaiming
> History," if only to use it to learn more in-depth details about the
> assassination, a reference book for historical facts of the era,
complete
> bios of Oswald and Ruby, and generally as simply a tremendous source of
> valuable information from its massive, in depth stores of knowledge.
>
> Instead, all they want to do is attack him and his book because of its
LN
> conclusions and its blasting apart the conspiracy tales.
>
> My gosh, talk about shallow thinking!
>
> James
>
> <alo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
>
news:aaf18ad3-228e-42fa-a310-ddbdc4f1dcf0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> > well, I hope she's not your best student, John - otherwise you've got
> > a lot of work to do - she writes:
>
> > "Scott's failure occurs as throughout the entire book, and even in his
> > conclusion (titled "Who Killed JFK?"), he cannot simply label even one
> > large and all-inclusive unit, like the government, as being
> > responsible for JFK's death. He continually swings back and forth, all
> > in the name of deep political analysis, and seems to draw not one
> > conclusion but several contradictory ones. "
>
> > classic case of missing Scott's point, which is that the web of "deep
> > politics" is deep and complex, like the CIA's web of contradictions
> > and disinformation. =A0It is to Scott's CREDIT that he does not give a
> > concrete solution, though he is MUCH MORE detailed, in this book and
> > later essays related to Deep Politics 2, than she gives him credit for
> > (sorry John, but this student, like yourself, did too much skimming
> > and not enough reading; must have found the Cliff notes for Deep
> > Politics) Later work by Scott has included a discussion of the CIA's
> > disagreement with JFK on Cuba, on the back channels that were working
> > to subvert his Vietnam policy, etc. He is also brilliant on the Oswald
> > setup. Scott's discussion of Ruby, which she dismisses as having
> > nothing to do with a conspiracy, addresses not just the specifics of
> > conspiracy but the false legend that Ruby was not mobbed up - maybe
> > she needs to read the Warren Re****t, not to mention Seth Kantor (and
> > let's not get back to Reitz's =A0happy citation of Ruby's death bed
> > claim, before his mobster brother, that there was no conspiracy; give
> > me a break) - the point is that the Warren Commission had to dismiss
> > his mob ties in order to de-fang Ruby as a possible consprator; there
> > exists tons of cir***stantial evidence that his action was an
> > execution, but that's another thread. She also ignores Scott's
> > effective linkage of the CIA with the international drug trade, which,
> > ironically or not, the CIA basically set up as a business (see Doug
> > Valentine) and which, in my opinion, was probably even a stronger
> > reason than Cuba for the CIA/mobster/exile renegade hatred of JFK and
> > RFK - (follow the money, as a smart man once said) -
> > My grade: C- =A0(good penman****p, however) -
> > -Allen Lowe- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
The central thesis of scott's book is that since the end of WWII,
there exists something he calls "the nationally protected drug
traffic." In the JFK era, this network consisted of heroin from the
Golden Triangle (SE Asia), grown by CIA backed Laotian tribes,
smuggled by corrupt S. Vietnamese, then trafficked by French mafia to
the Trafficante mafia group, which employed many Cuban exiles. He
states that when JFK and RFK targeted parts of this network, with
their prosecutions of mob figures and disbanding of Cuban exile
groups, they became a target of this network.
Scott has much evidence to back this up, including a 1956 FBI memo
naming Ruby as part of this opium/heroin network and having the "fix"
with police. Arrested in Dealy Plaza was Jim Braden, a man with a
long record of arrests and associations with mob figures, and also
arrested and de****ted from Dallas on 11/22/63 was Michael Mertz, a
French mafia heroin trafficker, mob hitman and probable CIA asset (QJ/
WIN).
Under the current Bush government we see confirmation of Scott's
central thesis, that there is a protected drug traffic. Opium
production in Afghanistan has gone from 70 tons under the Taliban in
2001 to almost 9,000 tons in 2007. American troops are ordered NOT to
interfere with the opium crop.
[url]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080506/ap_on_re_as/
marines_in_poppies;_ylt=3DAnypaBdimFHtU1YM9ggvIM2s0NUE[/url]
|
