City Manager Memorandum To Honorable Mayor And City: Fill & Download for Free

She means for blacks to not be accepting of white cops murdering them like some whites want them to do. If black cops were executing unarmed white people, there would be a lot of black cops executed for murder, there would be a ban on black men becoming officers and there would be white militia everywhere shooting black cops AND the supreme court would get rid of any thing resembling qualified immunity.This article is from the Guardian Dec.13 2019 1 pm est.For decades, anti-government and white supremacist groups have been attempting to recruit police officers – and the authorities themselves aren’t even certain about the scale of the problem.Ever since he was a teenager, Joshua Doggrell has believed that the former slave-holding states of the American south should secede from the United States. When he was a freshman in college at the University of Alabama in 1995, Doggrell discovered a group whose worldview chimed with his – the League of the South. The League believes that white southern culture is in danger of extinction from forces such as religious pluralism, homosexuality and interracial coupling. Doggrell wanted to protect that culture. In 2006, when he was 29 years old, he applied to be a police officer in Anniston, Alabama, a sparsely populated city at the foothills of the Appalachian mountains, where more than half of the residents are people of colour. On his police application, Doggrell wrote that he was a member of the League. Shortly after, he was hired.During nearly a decade on the police force, Doggrell was a vocal advocate for the League, working to recruit fellow officers to the group. He encouraged his colleagues to attend the League’s monthly meetings, which he held at a steakhouse not far from the police station. On Facebook, he posted neo-Confederate material, including a photo of an early leader of the Ku Klux Klan, and wrote that he was “against egalitarianism in all forms”. He often refused to be in the room when the department recited the pledge of allegiance in front of the American flag.In 2013, Doggrell delivered the opening speech at the League’s annual conference, on how to “cultivate the good will” of police officers. “The vast majority of men in uniform are aware that they’re southerners,” Doggrell told the audience, which included the prominent neo-Nazi Matthew Heimbach and another Anniston police officer Doggrell had recruited to the group. Doggrell added that most southern officers were “a lot closer” to joining the League than they were 10 or 15 years ago. “My department,” he added, “has been very supportive of me. I’ve somehow been promoted twice since I was there.”Ivy League college apologizes for using bones of Black children in course“Everybody knew he was in the League of the South,” Matt Delozier, a retired sergeant from the Anniston police department, told us when we met him near Anniston earlier this year. “I think the general consensus was that nobody understood – if you’re out here in law enforcement in a supervisor’s role, why are you involved in this group?” But it wasn’t until 2015, when a leaked video of Doggrell’s speech led to a report that went viral across the US, that the city’s manager fired him. (Doggrell’s superiors did not raise any concerns over his conduct as an officer.) Doggrell went on to appeal the dismissal and sue both the city and the city manager, arguing that his termination had violated his constitutional rights.Although it is unusual for a police officer to be so open about his involvement in an extremist organisation, for decades, anti-government and white-supremacist groups have been attempting to recruit police officers into their ranks. “It is something a lot of folks are overlooking,” says Vida B Johnson, an assistant professor of law at Georgetown University. “Police forces are becoming more interested in talking about implicit bias – the unconscious, racial biases we carry with us as Americans. But people aren’t really addressing the explicit biases that are present on police forces.”According to Johnson’s research, there have been at least 100 different scandals, in more than 40 different states, involving police officers who have sent racist emails and text messages, or made racist comments on social media, since the 1990s. A recent investigation by the Center for Investigative Reporting found that hundreds of active-duty and retired law enforcement officers from around the country were members of confederate, anti-government and anti-Islam groups on Facebook. But there is no official record of officers who are tied to white supremacist or other extremist groups because, in the US, there is no federal policy for screening or monitoring the country’s 800,000+ law enforcement officers for extremist views. The 18,000 or so police departments across the country are largely left to police themselves.To much of the rest of the country, the town of Anniston, Alabama is primarily known as the site of a traumatic episode in the American civil rights movement. On 14 May 1961, the Freedom Riders, a group of black and white civil rights activists, arrived by bus in Anniston to protest segregation. They were attacked by a mob of Ku Klux Klansmen, who slashed the bus’s tyres, broke its windows and set fire to it in an attempt to kill the protesters. Even though the Anniston police department was only a block away, the officers didn’t show up on the scene until the early afternoon, and made no arrests.Today, Anniston remains sharply divided along racial lines. The majority of the city’s black community lives south-west of downtown, in run-down, single-storey houses. East of the city centre, manicured lawns and picket fences adorn the predominantly white neighbourhood. Although roughly 50% of the city’s 24,000 residents are black, the people who govern the city are mostly white. “It always comes down to leadership,” said David E Reddick, one of the city’s two black council members and a former president of the local chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, when we met in his office. “You’ve got a city where you’ve got three whites and two blacks on the council, and you need three votes to get anything done.”A Freedom Rider bus in flames in Anniston, Alabama, May 1961. Photograph: Anonymous/AP“Blacks are being targeted in this city,” Reddick continued. According to the city’s other black council member, Ben Little, its officers regularly pull black people over for minor offences such as traffic violations. Little also said that members of the police department had often intimidated and harassed him, or stood by while others did. After being particularly vocal in his criticisms of police abuses in 2012, he woke up one morning to find caution tape wrapped like a noose around his truck. When Little and Reddick voiced their concerns about local policing two years ago, the local newspaper, the Anniston Star, responded with the headline: “NAACP leaders, with little evidence, claim racism by police, courts”.Joshua Doggrell claims that his views are not unusual in Anniston. “My people are Southern people and we grew up proud of our Southern heritage,” he told us, when we met him at a restaurant where he used to host League of the South meetings. He is solidly built, with a round, puffy face, and drove a black pickup truck with Confederate flags on the front bumper. He insisted that he was not a racist or a white supremacist, and claims that he had ceased his involvement with the League by early 2015, but admitted he thought “there are some things the white race did better throughout the history of mankind, like governing”. He couched his extremist views in careful terms, often centred on his religious beliefs: he wasn’t “against blacks”, he claimed – he just didn’t believe God had created the races to be mixed.Doggrell presented himself as a victim who had been wronged by the city when he was fired from the police department. When he joined the force in 2006, none of his superiors flagged his membership in the League of the South as an issue, he told us. (The police department refused multiple requests for interviews.) Three years later, Doggrell started a local chapter of the League, and invited a number of fellow officers to its first meeting. At the meeting, the League’s founder, a former history professor named Michael Hill, argued that the time had come for a new civil war. “The way I look at it,” Hill told the group, “This is round two of the same battle.”The department’s tolerance for Doggrell seemed to be mirrored by some of the local press. When Doggrell held his League chapter’s first meeting, in an Anniston diner, he invited a reporter from the Anniston Star to cover it. The Star published a 380-word account of the meeting that read like the announcement of a new seniors’ night at the bingo hall: “Local Secessionists Hold 1st Meeting.”But several people of colour in Anniston recognised Doggrell’s name in the report and were alarmed. Abdul Khalil’llah, the director of an Anniston-based civil rights organisation, sent letters to the Alabama attorney general’s office and the US secretary of homeland security in April 2009. “I was basically astonished to hear that a police officer – someone who’d taken an oath to uphold the law – could be in a neo-Confederate type of organisation,” Khalil’llah said.Joshua DoggrellKhalil’llah’s letters went unanswered, but in response to his complaints, the Anniston police department decided to conduct an internal investigation into Doggrell later that year. A few officers had found Doggrell’s views odd, but the department decided to take no action against him. “He is a dedicated, professional police officer,” then police chief, John Dryden, wrote in a report. “He has never showed any radical action in his duties as a police officer.” It was not a concern to the police department that Doggrell was part of an organisation that the Southern Poverty Law Center, which monitors rightwing extremist organisations, had labelled a “hate group” since 2000. (The SPLC “can label anything”, Dryden wrote in the report.)Not long after the investigation, Doggrell was promoted to sergeant and then, a few years later, to lieutenant. Doggrell’s former boss, Layton McGrady, acknowledged at a 2015 hearing into Doggrell’s dismissal that Doggrell’s association with the League of the South wasn’t a factor when he was up for promotion. Asked why not, McGrady said it “didn’t affect his job performance or the police department”.While not every police officer who is tied to a white supremacist group will necessarily act out their beliefs violently, the presence of even a single radicalised officer can terrorise a community. “Even if the number of officers is numerically small, because of the intense risks posed of having a ticking time bomb like that in a department, that’s a big deal,” said Brian Levin, a former NYPD officer who directs the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism in California.In a number of cases, ideologically radicalised police officers have gone on to commit extreme forms of violence. In one of the most disturbing cases, a civil rights lawsuit from 1991 alleged that a group of officers from the Los Angeles county sheriff’s department systematically terrorised and harassed minority residents by vandalising their homes, beating and torturing them, and even killing members of the community. The accused officers turned out to be members of the Lynwood Vikings, a “neo-Nazi, white supremacist gang”, according to a federal judge. (The county settled the case for $9m.) In 2012, an officer in Little Rock, Arkansas who had once attended a KKK meeting, shot and killed a 15-year-old black boy. Earlier this year, in Holton, Michigan, an officer was fired after a framed KKK application and Confederate flags were discovered in his home.“Since the inception of this nation, black people have been under threat from the police,” said Whitney Shepard, who works at the DC-based organisation Stop Police Terror Project. “There’s not really ever been a time in this country where the police have protected our communities.”In Chicago, reparations aren’t just an idea. They’re the lawRead moreIn 2006, a leaked report from the FBI’s counterterrorism division warned that white supremacists have spent decades trying to “infiltrate law enforcement communities or recruit law enforcement personnel”. The document, first reported on by the Intercept, noted that the term “ghost skins” had gained currency among white supremacists, to describe extremists who “avoid overt displays of their beliefs to blend into society and covertly advance white supremacist causes”.But experts have difficulty gauging the number of white supremacists within law enforcement. Some give ballpark figures in the low hundreds, while others can’t give an estimate at all. This has led some to downplay the issue. “Let’s say you’ve got thousands that are sympathetic or members of extremist groups,” a former FBI analyst said to us. “Is that a big deal? It’s not good, obviously, because police officers do have such great power, but I wouldn’t say it’s a huge problem.”The problem may be growing, though. “We’re seeing the radical right rise in substantial ways, and inevitably that is reflected in police forces and security forces more generally,” said Mark Potok, a senior fellow at the Centre for Analysis of the Radical Right. Although the FBI keeps tabs on white supremacist and other types of extremist groups operating within the US, it typically only mounts full investigations when there’s a reasonable indication of criminal activity. The Bureau may know of some officers who are active members of white supremacist organisations, but it maintains that it’s not the FBI’s place to remove them from police forces unless they violate federal law. “We do not and will not police ideology,” an FBI spokesperson wrote in an email, after the Bureau denied repeated requests for an interview.“It’s astonishing to me that we have an FBI that acknowledges these white-supremacist police officers exist and they don’t have any plan to address it,” said Michael German, a former FBI agent and current fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice. “Or to protect the communities who they’re obligated to protect under the civil rights laws.”In the speech that eventually got him fired, Doggrell spoke about the importance of recruiting police officers to the League of the South, and resisting the federal government’s interference in their communities. “Kith and kin comes before illegal national mandates,” he said.When people in Anniston’s black community found out about Doggrell’s speech, “it was like another Ferguson in Anniston,” David Reddick, the city council member, said, referring to the mass protests that had shaken Ferguson, Missouri after a police officer there killed an unarmed black teenager named Michael Brown. “It had that feeling that it could break out at any moment.”Two days after the SPLC’s report about Doggrell’s speech went viral, Anniston’s city manager fired him. (The other police officer who had joined the League, Wayne Brown, retired.) The department portrayed Doggrell’s case as an aberration, even though it had tolerated his ideology for years. “This anomaly should not end up characterising that department at all,” the mayor said. In response, Doggrell appealed his dismissal on the basis of wrongful termination, and filed a separate claim stating his free speech and religious rights had been violated. Both were denied; but his wrongful termination appeal is still pending with the circuit court of Calhoun County. The League of the South helped to raise between $10,000 and $15,000 to cover his legal fees.Downtown Anniston, Alabama. Photograph: Chris PruittThe reason that extremist groups are allowed to exist in the US is because of the first amendment to the constitution, which ostensibly protects all citizens’ freedom of expression. In many European countries, the law prohibits membership of hate groups that express explicitly racist, neo-Nazi, antisemitic or homophobic views. The question in the US is whether free speech rights apply to law enforcement officers and other public servants in the same way as they do to private citizens.In Anniston, many people saw Doggrell’s membership in the League as an extension of his rights. “There’s first-amendment issues that have to be addressed if you are going to terminate someone for being a member of that group,” said Bruce Downey, the attorney who defended the city against Doggrell’s lawsuit, when we met at his office in July. That Doggrell was within his constitutional rights to be both in the police department and in the League seemed to be accepted inside the department, too. At the 2015 hearing into Doggrell’s dismissal, Anniston’s police chief acknowledged he had seen content he considered “edgy at best” on Doggrell’s Facebook page, but he hadn’t taken any action. “Social media is an issue with all of our officers, I will tell you that,” he said. “We don’t make it a habit of monitoring. As a matter of fact, we don’t monitor.”To others, however, the US’s full complement of free speech rights does not extend to law enforcement officers. “There are limitations on what government employees can do, especially where their speech implicates their ability to do their jobs properly,” said Chiraag Bains, the former senior counsel to the head of the Justice Department’s civil rights division. “So, if they’re associating with a white supremacist group, it’s within the police department’s authority to say that the person cannot do that job.” Bains added that police officers are sworn to uphold the constitution, which promises equal treatment under the law to all Americans, regardless of race. The US court of appeals, too, has found that the “interest in maintaining a relationship of trust between the police and fire departments and the communities they serve” outweighs officers’ right to free expression.Had the video of Doggrell’s speech never gone viral, though, it’s quite likely he would still be serving on the Anniston police force. Regardless of what the courts decide about officers’ free speech rights, it’s exceptionally difficult for private citizens to force local departments to take action against extremists within their ranks.In the three years since President Trump has been in office, white supremacists have become increasingly emboldened. The deadly “Unite the Right” rally in 2017, in which 600 far-right supporters clashed with anti-racist protesters in Charlottesville, Virginia, was a “wake-up call” that white supremacist groups were resurgent, said the Anti-Defamation League. But despite the fact that white supremacists and far-right extremists have killed more people in the US in the last decade than adherents of any other ideology have, the Trump administration has done little to address the threat. Instead, it has reduced the federal oversight of white supremacist groups. Soon after taking office, Trump cut the Department of Homeland Security’s budget for terrorism prevention, which includes domestic terrorism, from $24m in 2017 to $3m today, according to the former Obama administration counterterrorism official Nate Snyder.In 2018, attorney general Jeff Sessions – a former Alabama senator who once joked that he thought KKK members “were OK until I learned they smoked pot” – signed a memorandum that restricted the Justice Department’s ability to oversee troubled police departments, including the 14 that had agreed to be monitored under the Obama administration because of their records of racial discrimination and police abuse. “The misdeeds of individual bad actors,” Sessions wrote, “should not impugn or undermine the legitimate and honorable work that law enforcement officers and agencies perform in keeping American communities safe.”Earlier this year, the FBI revealed that it had changed its classification system for terrorism cases. While there were once 11 categories, including a specific one for white supremacy, the new list featured just four, including the catch-all “racially motivated violent extremism”. This change means it’s now harder to narrow down exactly what resources the FBI is putting toward the specific threat of white supremacy, including within police forces.Yet when it comes to policing police officers for extremist ties, the FBI has not changed its policy since the civil rights era, said German, the former FBI agent. “Many of these cases end up resting on kind of weak grounds where it’s only if a person posts something on social media, or otherwise publicises their role in a way that damages the public perception of the police agency, that the agency can take action,” he added. “I’m more concerned about the guy who’s a white supremacist who is not making it public, and is perhaps engaged in behaviour on the job that is harming people on a daily basis.”Still, it’s unclear whether greater federal oversight would actually solve the problem. “In theory it could help, but that means we would have to not have a broken democracy,” said Shepard of the activist group Stop Police Terror Project. “We’d have to have folks that would take the accountability measure seriously and I honestly at this point do not have faith in that happening for black people.” Mark Potok, from the Centre for Analysis of the Radical Right, made a similar point: “At this point, since the election of Trump, we’ve seen so many cases of strongly racist cops – it’s become even more imperative to put these departments on some kind of oversight from outside. And really, I’m talking about civilian review boards.”In Anniston, things have mostly stayed the same since Doggrell was fired. After Doggrell’s termination, according to Reddick the police department began hiring more diverse staff. It also started requiring each of its officers to affirm in writing that he or she was “not a member of a group that will cause embarrassment to the City of Anniston or the Anniston police department”. But the council’s black leaders are still outnumbered, and the city is still divided. In July, a group of residents proposed redrawing the city limits to exclude Anniston’s black neighbourhoods.A lynching in Georgia: the living memorial to America’s history of racist violenceRead moreA number of residents we spoke to in Anniston remained unsure of why exactly Doggrell had been fired. “I heard he was an exemplary police officer, in a biracial relationship, and no signs of racism,” one of the three white council members wrote in an email. (Doggrell is not in a biracial relationship and does not condone those who are.) Unprompted, during our interview, the lawyer Bruce Downey, who defended the city against Doggrell’s lawsuit, said he thought Doggrell was a “very intelligent guy and a deep thinker”.To Anniston council member Ben Little, the city’s black residents are still fighting a similar battle to the one his enslaved ancestors fought – one that was not exclusively against the police department, but against the “racial backwardness” of a city that treated its minority population with “oppression and inequality”. Nobody in the community was surprised to find out that a member of the police force had belonged to a neo-Confederate group, he added. “They were only surprised that it was so bold and out there,” he said. “But we knew it all along.”This story was supported by the Fund for Investigative Journalism

It is fake news.The Arabs, I will not dignify the Palestinian narrative, it is based on a lie, they were not forced out, they left at the urging of their fellow Arabs.But please, don’t take my word for this, how about we look at what they said, the people that were witness to the events at the time. I give this from an article published in 0censor. Did Israel Really Ethnically Cleanse The Palestinians?We have heard this for years now, the Palestinians were ethnically cleansed out of what today is Israel, the narrative has been told and retold to such an extent that now people repeat it as if it is a fact, but is it? But how true is this claim that Israel went about to ethnically cleanse the Arabs from their territories?The narrative is that leading up to the war of 1948 the Jews went around, rounded up the Arabs and ethnically cleansed their lands of them, expelling them by force, or slaughtering them if they would not leave. Is this true, do historical records bear this out? Not really.To understand we first have to first understand what was happening at the time. It was 1948, the British due to promising more than one person the same area of land, which, by the way, was in direct violation of the Mandate of Palestine, went to the UN and told them they were no longer able to administer the Mandate.WHAT WAS THE MANDATE AND HOW WAS IT CREATED?At the end of the first world war, one of the powers that were aligned with the axis was the Ottoman Empire, in addition to the Hapsburg Empire being forced to disband the Ottoman was as well.The problem was the holdings held in sovereign by these empires, the land now had to be dealt with. With the Hapsburg Empire, you had governments already set up that answered the central government, setting them up as independent entities were not that difficult, but with the Ottoman Empire much of this was not set up in such away.Three territories were without any type of ruling party set up, which would have been Mesopotamia and the Syrian Territories. The Ottomans in the Treaty of Sevres surrendered their sovereign holdings to the League of Nations, they in turn by democratic vote set up the mandates, one from the Mesopotamia area, the other two were split up from the Syrian territories, thus you had the Mandate of Syria and Palestine created out of this territory.The lands were split, sometimes with a ruling class already in place. With France they took over the Mandate of Syria and the Minor Mandate of Lebanon, Syria needed to have a functioning government set up, Lebanon already had such a government in place.The land was then further split up by the two powers, Britain and France at the urging of the League of Nations, many times they acted in direct violation of the Mandates, such as stripping the Golan Heights from the Mandate of Palestine and passing it to the Mandate of Syria [1].Syrian territory was split between the French with the Mandate of Syria, the British with the Mandate of Palestine, out of this After already stripping the Golan Heights from the Mandate, the British then set off to strip over 75% off the total area to appease the Arabs and set up Transjordan, this later became Jordan.It was the Mandate of Palestine, this was set up to dictate how the division of the land by the League of Nations would be taken care of. While there were minor mandates, the only ones we will deal with here are the three major mandates, the Mandate of Mesopotamia, Syria, and Palestine.The problem came about with the Arab belief that the land was theirs, much of this had to do with the Islamic idea that once the area is controlled by Islam, it is their religious duty to keep it that way. I get more into this with “DID ISRAEL STEAL THE ANCESTRAL HOME OF THE PALESTINIANS?“.The problem was the Arabs were not willing to share the land, they demanded it all, settle for nothing less, and that is exactly what they got – Nothing.It was after this the violence rose in numbers, the attacks increased against the Jews until the Jews were forced to build up their own defense groups, thus groups like Haganah, Irgun, and other groups to protect their fellow Jews. Soon there was a full-fledged civil war, the British found they could not manage the area, so they pulled out.Thus you have the next step, the declaration of nationhood after the Arabs rejected UN Resolution #181, Ben Gurion in his own speech said they declared nationhood to fulfill the Mandate of Palestine, that Mandate gave all the land to the Jews.It was the ensuing war that followed that started this whole lie that Jews went about to ethnically cleanse the Arabs from their lands. But if you listen to what the Arabs said at the time, what we are told and what is historically accurate simply don’t agree with each other.And what did the Arabs say? Let’s have a look:“The Arab armies entered Palestine to protect the Palestinians from the Zionist tyranny but, instead they abandoned them, forced them to emigrate and to leave their homeland, imposed upon them a political and ideological blockade and threw them into prisons similar to the ghettos in which the Jews used to live in Eastern Europe as if we were condemned to change places with them. The Arab states succeeded in scattering the Palestinians and in destroying their unity.” abu-Mazen (Falastin el-Th’ora, Beirut, March 1976)Secretary-General of the Arab League, Azzam Pasha, agreed that Arab leaders encouraged Palestinians to temporarily leave their homes: “It was promised that conquering Palestine would be a military picnic, our advice to the Palestinians was to temporarily leave their homes.” (Al-Huda, Lebanon June 5th, 1951).Syrian Prime Minister, Khalid Al-Azam (in his book Memories, 1973) laments and writes: “We brought disaster on the refugees when we urged them to abandon their homes.”“The Arab Exodus …was not caused by the actual battle, but by the exaggerated description spread by the Arab leaders to incite them to fight the Jews. …For the flight and fall of the other villages, it is our leaders who are responsible because of their dissemination of rumors exaggerating Jewish crimes and describing them as atrocities to inflame the Arabs … By spreading rumors of Jewish atrocities, killings of women and children, etc., they instilled fear and terror in the hearts of the Arabs in Palestine, until they fled leaving their homes and properties to the enemy.” – The Jordanian daily newspaper Al Urdun, April 9, 1953.“The wholesale exodus was due partly to the belief of the Arabs, encouraged by the boasting of an unrealistic press and the irresponsible utterances of some of the Arab leaders that it could be only a matter of some weeks before the Jews were defeated by the armies of the Arab states, and the Palestinian Arabs enabled to re-enter and retake possession of the country.” – Edward Atiyah (Secretary of the Arab League, London, The Arabs, 1955, p. 183)“The 15th May 1948, arrived … On that day the mufti of Jerusalem appealed to the Arabs of Palestine to leave the country because the Arab armies were about to enter and fight in their stead.”– The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, October 12, 1963.“The Arab governments told us: Get out so that we can get in. So we got out, but they did not get in.” A refugee quoted in Al Difaa (Jordan) on September 6, 1954.“The Arab armies entered Palestine to protect the Palestinians from the Zionist tyranny, but instead they abandoned them, forced them to emigrate and to leave their homeland, imposed upon them a political and ideological blockade and threw them into prisons similar to the ghettos in which the Jews used to live in Eastern Europe.The Arab states succeeded in scattering the Palestinian people and in destroying their unity. They did not recognize them as a unified people until the states of the world did so, and this is regrettable.” – The Current President of the Palestinian Authority- Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas), from the official journal of the PLO, Falastin el-Thawra (“What We Have Learned and What We Should Do”), Beirut, March 1976.“The Arab civilians panicked and fled ignominiously. Villages were frequently abandoned before they were threatened by the progress of the war.” General Glubb Pasha (the British officer who helped build the Transjordanian Army) wrote this in the London Daily Mail (August 12, 1948)The Beirut Institute for Palestinian Studies found that “fully two-thirds of the Palestinians fled their homes without ever seeing a Jewish soldier or hearing a shot fired.”Lastly, there were some expulsions by the IDF, along these lines: When Moshe Dayan’s lightly armored force (two armored cars stolen from the British and a few home-made armored trucks) broke through at Lydda (Lod), the Arabs fighting threw down their arms while Dayan’s force continued to Ramla.Seeing the Jewish force continue past them, the Arabs picked up their weapons and resumed fighting, being defeated a second time. At that point, it was decided that there was no way to intern them in Pow camps, so they were escorted to Latrun, where they were handed over to the Jordanians.QUOTES CONFIRMING THAT ARAB LEADERS TOLD THE ARABS TO FLEE:1. “The first group of our fifth column consists of those who abandon their homes… At the first sign of trouble they take to their heels to escape sharing the burden of struggle.”— Ash-Sha’ab, Jaffa, 1.30.482. “(The fleeing villagers)… are bringing down disgrace on us all… by abandoning their villages.”— As-Sarah, Jaffa, 3.30.483. “Every effort is being made by the Jews to persuade the Arab populace to stay and carry on with their normal lives, to get their shops and businesses open and to be assured that their lives and interests will be safe.”— Haifa District HQ of the British Police, April 26, 1948, (quoted in Battleground by Samuel Katz).4. “The mass evacuation, prompted partly by fear, partly by order of Arab leaders, left the Arab quarter of Haifa a ghost city… By withdrawing Arab workers their leaders hoped to paralyze Haifa.”— Time Magazine, May 3, 1948, page 255. “The Arab streets (of Palestine) are curiously deserted (because)… following the poor example of the moneyed class, there has been an exodus from Jerusalem, but not to the same extent as from Jaffa and Haifa.”— London Times, 5.5.486. “The Arab civilians panicked and fled ignominiously. Villages were frequently abandoned before they were threatened by the progress of the war.”— General John Glubb “Pasha,” The London Daily Mail, August 12, 19487. “The fact that there are these refugees is the direct consequence of the act of the Arab states in opposing partition and the Jewish state. The Arab states agreed upon this policy unanimously and they must share in the solution of the problem.” — Emile Ghoury, secretary of the Palestinian Arab Higher Committee, in an interview with the Beirut Telegraph 9/6/1948 (same appeared in The London Telegraph, 8.48)8. “The most potent factor [in the flight of Palestinians] was the announcements made over the air by the Arab-Palestinian Higher Executive, urging all Haifa Arabs to quit… It was clearly intimated that Arabs who remained in Haifa and accepted Jewish protection would be regarded as renegades.”— London Economist Oct. 2, 1948)9. “It must not be forgotten that the Arab Higher Committee encouraged the refugees’ flight from their homes in Jaffa, Haifa, and Jerusalem.”— Near East Arabic Broadcasting Station, Cyprus, 4.3.4910. “[The Arabs of Haifa] fled in spite of the fact that the Jewish authorities guaranteed their safety and rights as citizens of Israel.”— Monsignor George Hakim, Greek Catholic Bishop of Galilee, New York Herald Tribune, June 30, 194911. “The military and civil (Israeli) authorities expressed their profound regret at this grave decision (taken by the Arab military delegates of Haifa and the Acting Chair of the Palestine Arab Higher Committee to evacuate Haifa despite the Israeli offer of a truce). The Jewish mayor of Haifa made a passionate appeal to the delegation (of Arab military leaders) to reconsider its decision.”— Memorandum of the Arab National Committee of Haifa, 1950, to the governments of the Arab League, quoted in J. B. Schechtman, The Refugees in the World, NY 1963, pp. 192f.12. Sir John Troutbeck, British Middle East Office in Cairo, noted in cables to superiors (1948-49) that the refugees (in Gaza) have no bitterness against Jews, but harbor intense hatred toward Egyptians: “They say ‘we know who our enemies are (referring to the Egyptians),’ declaring that their Arab brethren persuaded them unnecessarily to leave their homes… I even heard it said that many of the refugees would give a welcome to the Israelis if they were to come in and take the district over.”13. “The Arab states which had encouraged the Palestine Arabs to leave their homes temporarily in order to be out of the way of the Arab invasion armies, have failed to keep their promise to help these refugees.”— The Jordanian daily newspaper Falastin, Feb. 19, 1949.14. “The Secretary-General of the Arab League, Azzam Pasha, assured the Arab peoples that the occupation of Palestine and of Tel Aviv would be as simple as a military promenade… Brotherly advice was given to the Arabs of Palestine to leave their land, homes, and property to stay temporarily In neighboring fraternal states, lest the guns of invading Arab armies mow them down.”— Al Hoda (a New York-based Lebanese daily) June 8, 195115. “Who brought the Palestinians to Lebanon as refugees, suffering now from the malign attitude of newspapers and communal leaders, who have neither honor nor conscience? Who brought them over in dire straits and penniless, after they lost their honor? The Arab states and Lebanon amongst them did it.“— The Beirut Muslim weekly Kul-Shay, Aug. 19, 1951.16. “We will smash the country with our guns and obliterate every place the Jews seek shelter in. The Arabs should conduct their wives and children to safe areas until the fighting has died down.“— Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Said, quoted in “Sir An-Nakbah” (The Secret Behind the Disaster) by Nimr el-Hawari, Nazareth, 195216. “The Arab Exodus… was not caused by the actual battle, but by the exaggerated description spread by the Arab leaders to incite them to fight the Jews… For the flight and fall of the other villages, it is our leaders who are responsible because of their dissemination of rumors exaggerating Jewish crimes and describing them as atrocities in order to inflame the Arabs… By spreading rumors of Jewish atrocities, killings of women and children, etc., they instilled fear and terror in the hearts of the Arabs in Palestine, until they fled leaving their homes and properties to the enemy.”— The Jordanian daily newspaper Al Urdun, April 9, 1953.17. The Arab governments told us: Get out so that we can get in. So we got out, but they did not get in. (Quoting a refugee)— Al Difaa (Jordan) Sept. 6, 195418. “The wholesale exodus was due partly to the belief of the Arabs, encouraged by the boasting of an unrealistic press and the irresponsible utterances of some of the Arab leaders that it could be only a matter of some weeks before the Jews were defeated by the armies of the Arab states, and the Palestinian Arabs enabled to re-enter and re-take possession of their country.”— Edward Atiyah (Secretary of the Arab League, London, The Arabs, 1955, p. 183)19. “The Arab states do not want to solve the refugee problem. They want to keep it as an open sore, as an affront to the UN and as a weapon against Israel. Arab leaders do not give a damn whether Arab refugees live or die.”— Ralph Galloway, former head of UNWRA, 195620. “As early as the first months of 1948, the Arab League issued orders exhorting the people to seek temporary refuge in neighboring countries, later to return to their abodes… and obtain their share of abandoned Jewish property.”— Bulletin of The Research Group for European Migration Problems, 195721. “Israelis argue that the Arab states encouraged the Palestinians to flee. And Arabs still living in Israel recall being urged to evacuate Haifa by Arab military commanders who wanted to bomb the city.”— Newsweek, January 20, 196322. “The 15th May 1948, arrived… On that day the mufti of Jerusalem appealed to the Arabs of Palestine to leave the country because the Arab armies were about to enter and fight in their stead.”— The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, Oct. 12, 1963.23. In listing the reasons for the Arab failure in 1948, Khaled al-Azm (Syrian Prime Minister) notes that “…the fifth factor was the call by the Arab governments to the inhabitants of Palestine to evacuate it (Palestine) and leave for the bordering Arab countries. Since 1948, it is we who have demanded the return of the refugees, while it is we who made them leave. We brought disaster upon a million Arab refugees by inviting them and bringing pressure on them to leave. We have accustomed them to begging… we have participated in lowering their moral and social level… Then we exploited them in executing crimes of murder, arson and throwing stones upon men, women, and children… all this in the service of political purposes...” — Khaled el-Azm, Syrian prime minister after the 1948 War, in his 1972 memoirs, published in 1973Palestinian Leader Farouq Qaddoumi: “We Supported The Nazis In WWII because they were the enemies of the Zionists.”500,000 Arabs fled from the war THEY started in 1948 1 MILLION Jewish innocent citizens were kicked out as the Muslim nation set about to ethnically cleanse them from all Muslim countries (I will deal with this on another day).To get an idea about the father of the “Palestinians”, who Arafat and others learned from, I suggest strongly you watch this, it is an article about the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, It is lengthy, but is very accurate, everything can easily be confirmed.One finds out, the more you dig, the more the whole Palestinian narrative falls apart, if you look at their historical narrative, there is nothing. Their claim that Israel stole their land, nothing there as well. Each of these I go into, you will find the links, along with references, documents that support what I am saying, something you will NEVER get from them.The claim that the Jews are guilty of trying to ethnically cleanse these Arabs from their lands is just another lie in a long list of lies.[1] Franco-British Convention on Certain Points Connected with the Mandates for Syria and the Lebanon, Palestine, and Mesopotamia, signed 23 December 1920. Text available in American Journal of International Law, Vol. 16, No. 3, 1922, 122–126.Did Israel Really Ethnically Cleanse The Palestinians?

The question of whether the United States is run by a Deep State and, if so, what the nature of that Deep State might be, is increasingly topical, thanks largely to the election of President Donald Trump but also because of growing awareness of the true facts behind the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy, which long have been hidden from the American people. Enormous misconceptions persist about the existence and nature of the Deep State, which only add to the confusion about the subject.My proposition is that the Deep State is real. It has controlled the United States for 53 years. And it is today fearing for its life because of the Trump presidency.Three days befor JFK’s inauguration in 1961, Pres. Dwight Eisenhower warned Americans in his Farewell Address that America was now essentially on a perpetual war footing and therefore needed to safeguard its liberties against the unwarranted influence of the military-industrial complex. As difficult as it might be at first blush to contemplate, Nov. 22, 1963 was the day the MIC seized power and became the Deep State.The Deep State was born of treason. It was and is still centered on CIA, but it also consists of elements deliberately salted by CIA throughout America’s myriad other intelligence, security agencies, and the corporate media. It reaches deep within corporate America, especially the major defense contractors, many of whom were instrumental in the rise of CIA. It also includes elements of the Mafia, who have worked so closely with CIA over the years as to become virtually indistinguishable from it.The origins of the Deep State can be traced through many influences reaching back even to before the birth of the American Republic. They include the secret power of the Free Masons, the creation of a national bank, American front companies for the Rothschilds, the expanding powers of the federal government under Abraham Lincoln, the rise of the monopolists, the creation of the Federal Reserve, Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal creating Big Government and Big Labor to complement and offset the power of Big Business, and, especially, the decision at the end of the Second World War to absorb Nazi Germany’s Gehlen network of spies in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. Leading CIA at this time was Allen Dulles, formerly OSS, and before that a corporate attorney representing many of Germany’s blue chip companies. Under his leadership, the United States effectively gave German Gen. Reinhard Gehlen and his spies a get-out-of-jail-free card so long as they worked for the United States.Unfortunately, it became a case of the tail wagging the dog. Under the influence of both Dulles and the Gehlen element, and with the existential threat posed to the United States by the Soviet Union, CIA soon exceeded its charter of authorities and began to engage in operations designed to topple unfriendly or unhelpful governments, such as Mossadegh in Iran, Arbenz in Guatemala, Lumumba in the Congo, and Diệm in Vietnam. In the process, CIA also became less accountable and democratic in its outlook. When Fidel Castro seized power in Cuba and then surprised the United States by leading Cuba into the Communist Bloc, CIA plotted his overthrow in Operation Zapata, beginning with the Bay of Pigs landing by CIA-trained Cuban exiles.Zapata was principally planned by Vice President Richard Nixon and CIA Director Dulles. Nixon was widely expected to be elected president and to execute the operation. When Kennedy was elected instead, the operation was handed to him. He allowed it to go forward, and it quickly proved to be a debacle. Castro had been tipped off in advance and his forces were waiting at the beach. Kennedy decided against doubling down on the hand CIA had dealt him and manfully accepted responsibility for the disaster. Dulles and many of the Cuban exiles never forgave him. For his part, Kennedy no longer trusted Dulles or CIA. He fired Dulles and his deputy Charles Cabell and vowed to splinter CIA into a thousand pieces.In the Cuban Missile Crisis the following year, the United States and the Soviet Union went toe to toe in Cuba, bringing the world to the brink of nuclear war. Part of Kennedy’s successful formula for defusing the crisis was his promise to Soviet Premier Khruschev that the United States would never again attempt to invade Cuba. The U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff and Defense Secretary Robert McNamara had unanimously urged Kennedy to authorize a full-scale U.S. invasion. Instead, Kennedy defused the crisis diplomatically, avoiding almost certain nuclear war. Some of the generals concluded their commander-in-chief was an appeaser.In 1961, the same generals had supported a plan presented to Kennedy by Gen. Lyman Lemnitzer proposing an unprovoked nuclear first strike against the Soviet Union. Kennedy refused and left the meeting muttering: “And we call ourselves the human race!” Not long afterwards, the generals presented Kennedy with Operation Northwoods, a plan to wage a terror campaign in American cities and to blame the incidents on Castro as a pretext for invasion. Kennedy again refused.Instead, Kennedy sought a modus vivendi with the Communists. Among other things, he negotiated a Limited Nuclear Test Ban Treaty with the Soviets, challenged them to a peace race, issued National Security Action Memorandum 263, ordering the gradual withdrawal of U.S. forces from Vietnam, and sent word to Castro through a French journalist that the United States would not object to his communist leadership so long as he did not ally Cuba with the Soviet Union. It was while meeting with this journalist that Castro first received the news of JFK’s assassination.The USG under Kennedy had been engaged in numerous plots to destabilize Cuba. As Attorney General, Kennedy’s brother Robert headed at least one of these committees, overseeing Operation Mongoose. But the USG also was engaged in numerous plots to assassinate Castro. One, headed by American Cancer Society President Dr. Alton Ochsner, sought to develop a cancer virus for the USG’s use in assassinating Castro. Among those involved in this plot was a brilliant young cancer researcher recruited by Ochsner straight out of high school, named Judyth Vary Baker. Others included her eventual lover, Lee Harvey Oswald, and his former Civil Air Patrol instructor David Ferrie.The key to understanding the Kennedy assassination and the birth of the Deep State is first to realize that a bipartisan cabal of traitors -- cobbled together primarily by elements of CIA, at the behest of Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson and his business cronies -- used many of the same players who had been plotting regime change in Cuba to effect regime change in the United States, instead.Johnson and the Kennedy Brothers hated each other. Johnson had blackmailed his way onto Kennedy’s ticket in 1960, using a dossier detailing Kennedy’s peccadilloes provided him by his close friend and next-door neighbor of 17 years J. Edgar Hoover. With the utmost reluctance, Kennedy had to retract his offer of the vice presidency to Missouri Senator Stuart Symington. “Landslide Lyndon” had cheated his way into the U.S. Senate by the skin of his teeth with the help of his campaign manager, John Connally, and the stuffing of the ballot box in Precinct 13. LBJ was profoundly corrupt. He was in the pocket of Big Oil and took a slice of every major government defense contract that came before him. As Senate Majority Leader, he ensured that all such contracts would continue to move through him by taking the unprecedented step of having himself appointed chairman of a Senate Armed Services subcommittee. With the help of his personal hitman, Malcolm Wallace, Johnson plotted numerous political murders in order to cover up his corruption. But all was coming to an end for Johnson in November 1963. Kennedy was just beginning to campaign for re-election. He planned to replace Johnson in 1964 with Terry Sanford of North Carolina. Life Magazine, fed dirt on Johnson by Robert Kennedy’s Justice Department, was about to publish an exposé of Johnson’s ties to the Bobby Baker scandal in its December 1 edition. Secretary to the Senate, Baker had been LBJ’s bag man. At the time of the assassination, Johnson was just one step away from political humiliation and criminal charges.Anti-Soviet military hawks seeking war in Vietnam, Texas oil tycoons fearful of losing the oil depletion allowance, CIA officials fired by Kennedy over the Bay of Pigs debacle, mafiosi angered by Kennedy’s war on crime, Secret Service agents scandalized by Kennedy’s private behavior, jealous husbands cuckolded by Kennedy, etc. — Johnson knew Kennedy’s many enemies in and outside the government and presented himself as their champion.One needn't give full credence to the views of LBJ's mistress of over 20 years, or to Billie Sol Estes' sworn affidavit, or to E. Howard Hunt's confession, or to Marita Lorenz' open court testimony, or to LBJ's personal attorney's allegations, or to the identification of Malcolm Wallace’s fingerprint at the TBSD snipers nest, or to James Files’ confession as the Grassy Knoll gunman to conclude that LBJ was behind, or in the least acquiesced to, the assassination. A lot of circumstantial evidence suggests it. The story even goes that LBJ was carrying in his pocket the oath of office that was used to swear him in aboard Air Force One. Anyone can see the photo of him sharing a wink and grin with his protégé and alleged criminal accomplice Texas Cong. Albert Thomas immediately after taking the oath.Although he supposedly feared a Cuban or Soviet conspiracy, it's telling that Johnson didn't raise the military alert level. Neither did the Joint Chiefs, although the U.S. Commander in the Pacific did, on his own authority. It's also telling that the Joint Chiefs had completely reversed Kennedy's Vietnam policy by the end of the very first business day after his assassination.Thanks to the determined efforts of certain dogged researchers, and the advent of the Internet, which allows investigators to compare research, the evidence that has surfaced in the 53 years since the assassination points more and more to Oswald’s deep ties to U.S. Intelligence, his probable innocence and the existence of a wider conspiracy reaching deep into the government, designed to install Johnson in the presidency.The FBI tracked Oswald’s movements since at least 1960, when FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover warned the State Department that someone seemed to be impersonating Oswald, then in the Soviet Union as part of a CIA phony defector program. A gung-ho Marine who enlisted at age 17, Oswald was obsessed with the idea of becoming a double agent. He worked as a radar operator at Atsugi Naval Air Station in Japan, which had responsibility for CIA’s U-2 overflights of the Soviet Union and, we now know, the People’s Republic of China. The government trained him in Russian and gave him an honorable discharge, after which he immediately departed for St. Petersburg. The hope was that the KGB would recruit Oswald to spy for it in the United States. When the KGB didn’t take the bait, Oswald returned to the United States, at State Department expense, and walked into a job at a graphic arts company that processed highly classified photography from Cuban overflights for the USG. The FBI paid him $200/month to pretend to be a Communist sympathizer in order to help it identify potentially pro-Castro Cubans. He reported to FBI Agent Guy Bannister. He also became part of the plot to kill Castro led by Ochsner.At that time, Oswald and Judyth Vary Baker were pretending to work at a coffee canning company. Instead, they worked out of Ferrie’s kitchen, where Baker’s job was to use lab rats to create the most virulent cancer virus possible. An anti-Castro agent was supposed to inject Castro with the virus, which was designed to work even more effectively once Castro’s immune system was damaged by x-rays. Oswald traveled to Mexico City in October 1963 for the purpose of handing off the virus to a Cuban contact, but his contact never showed. When young Baker objected to Ochsner in writing to his use of Angola State Penitentiaey inmates as guinea pigs in testing the virus, Ochsner removed Baker from the program and cut short her promising career. After Baker and Oswald became lovers, Oswald confided to Baker that he was trying to foil an assassination plot against Kennedy.Oswald is known to have admired Kennedy and may have been the FBI informant, named "Lee," who Secret Service Agent Abraham Bouldin said had tipped off the government to the plot against Kennedy's life in Chicago two weeks before Dallas. A note from “A. Hidell” —an Oswald alias—reportedly had warned Dallas Police Department of a plot against the president but disappeared after a post-assassination sweep of Dallas PD offices by the FBi. The “threat note” received from Oswald by FBI Agent James Hosty likely warned of a threat against the president. If it had threatened the FBI to stay away from Oswald’s wife, as Hosty claimed, then why is it that Hosty destroyed the note on his supervisor’s orders? The most obvious answer is that he did so because the note tended to exonerate Oswald at a time when Hoover was determined to portray Oswald as the lone gunman.Lee Oswald had no apparent motive for killing Kennedy. It made no sense that he should first try to assassinate someone on the political right (Gen. Edwin Walker) and then on the political left (Pres. Kennedy). It made no sense that if he was the mean-spirited doctrinaire Marxist the FBI made him out to be, and with the whole world hanging on his every word, instead of proudly owning the assassination, he protested that he was a patsy.Oswald also didn’t have the means. No reliable evidence connected him to the Mannlicher-Carcano, including the doctored backyard photos and the shipment to a post office box belonging to one "A. Hidell," on the basis of a money order that was never deposited. A Dallas PD paraffin test indicated he hadn't fired a rifle that day. The 14-year old witness in the Edwin Walker shooting saw two men fleeing, and neither looked like Oswald. The caliber of the bullet found in Walker’s wall did not match that from the Mannlicher-Carcano. The pistol he allegedly used to kill Officer Tippett couldn’t even fire due to a bent firing pin.Finally, Oswald didn’t have the opportunity. Reliable eyewitness testimony showed he was not on the Sixth Floor of the Texas School Book Depository at the time of the assassination. Dallas PD Officer Marrion Baker found him drinking a Coke in the second floor lunchroom just 90 seconds after the shooting. After that, we’re asked to believe the “assassin” fled on a public bus and offered the first taxi that came around to a woman. Oswald’s prints were never found on the gun until after two FBI agents planted Oswald’s palm print on it during a visit to his slain body in the funeral homeIt does appear that Oswald had some prior knowledge of the plot. But then, so did Elizabeth Cole, Christian David, Richard Case Nagell, Gary Underwood, Rose Cheramie, Gerry Patrick Hemming, Joseph Milteer, Felipe Vidal Santiago, PFC Eugene B. Dinkin, Wayne January, and Anton Erdinger, among others. Not to mention LBJ, ducking low in his car seat after the turn onto Elm Street, the Oath of Office in his pocket.Oswald could not have been fairly convicted. Accordingly, he was denied even minimum standards of due process. He had no access to an attorney. His police line-up was a farce. The single prison phone call to which he was entitled--he tried to call a retired Army intelligence officer--was deliberately prevented by the government from being connected. No record was kept of his interrogations. Lots of red flags there.But Oswald's murder by Jack Ruby was surely the first strong indication of conspiracy. Of course, what looked like a gangland hit to silence a potentially problematic witness was quickly explained away as the misguided but well-meaning act of another Lone Nut. Never mind the dozen different witnesses who said Oswald knew Ruby. They must have "been mistaken."Silvia Odio claimed she'd met Oswald with two anti-Castro Cubans some weeks before, but she must have "been mistaken," too, even though she never sought publicity, her sister confirmed the visit, and she'd written to her father of the meeting shortly afterward.They never tell you that Ruby was a gun runner to Cuba, helped spring underworld boss Santos Trafficante from a Cuban prison, and was once hired to work on the staff of then-Congressman Richard Nixon, as a favor to then-Senator Lyndon Johnson, who wanted to exempt him from having to testify before the House Un-American Activities Committee. It’s in the Congressional Record but isn’t newsworthy enough to compete against the Kardashians, apparently. Ruby began to hint broadly in prison that Johnson was behind the assassination. After a jail cell injection, Ruby publicly charged that the USG had just given him cancer. Ruby was told to stop being so paranoid, but he indeed died within just a few weeks of a previously-undiagnosed and particularly virulent form of cancer.The case against George H.W. Bush is stronger than the case against Lee Oswald. Poppy Bush was already working for CIA and in Dallas that day. He perjured himself to the U.S. Congress when he claimed he’d never worked for CIA before his appointment as its Director. He wasrecruited ti CIA directly out of Yale. He created Zapata Offshore Oil with a CIA partner for the purpose of helping to provide logistical support to the Bay of Pigs landings. At the time of the assassination, he was CIA liaison to the Cuban-American community. Many of the hitmen at Dealey Plaza were Cuban-Americans. In fact, Bush was temporarily detained as a “suspicious person” by Dallas PD at the Dal-Tex Building immediately after the assassination, as was mafioso James Braden. Bush appears in a photo of the scene just after the assassination. The second floor of the Dal-Tex Building, where a CIA front company was renting offices, is considered a very likely sniper site. Its low trajectory and field of vision were almost ideal. Bush has given conflicting accounts of his actions and whereabouts that day. Despite the solemnity of the event, as he recounted during his eulogy for Pres. Gerald Ford the crime committed in Dallas by that “lone, deranged gunman,” he broke into a wide grin. He once remarked “if the American people knew what we’d done, they’d chase us down the street and lynch us.” Maybe we should take him at his word.Johnson handpicked the Warren Commission in order to stave off a Congressional investigation and reassure the American people that no conspiracy was afoot, despite the testimony of witnesses who saw multiple gunmen. The Commission relied on the FBI, which cherrypicked the evidence and ignored, manipulated, discarded or otherwise suppressed anything that didn't fit the desired narrative of Oswald as the lone gunman. It was a Procrustean Bed, where the truth is stretched or cut away as much as editorial license requires in order to make the pieces of the government’s narrative fit, out of "patriotic duty." After all, what's a few white lies if they help to prevent World War III, as LBJ repeatedly intimated? Like the FBI investigation, its true purpose was to deflect suspicion from the one man with the greatest means, motive and opprtunity to kill the president, which was Lyndon B. Johnson.To be clear, working with the Mafia, and with the complicity of certain members of the military and the Secret Service, elements of CIA murdered Kennedy. The reins of government then passed to Johnson, whose influence was deepest in Texas, especially with Connally as Governor, and in Dallas, with Earle Cabell—Charles Cabell’s brother—as mayor. Johnson used the Secret Service and FBI to manipulate the Dallas PD. Hoover then led the FBI in framing Oswald for the crime. The Warren Commission relied wholly on the FBI investigation for its own conclusions.The Warren Report was treated from the beginning as unassailable holy writ. But as inconsistencies in the Report became apparent, CIA laid out its strategy, in Document 1035-960, to defend it. Ever since, skeptics have been mocked as “conspiracy theorists.” Thanks to CIA’s penetration of the American media, via Operation Mockingbird, and CIA's infiltration and discrediting of the Jim Garrison investigation, this strategy succeeded to such a degree the Kennedy Assassinaion is now regarded as the Third Rail of American journalism.Attorney General Robert Kennedy and First Lady Jackie Kennedy were the first conspiracy theorists. Bobby immediately (and correctly) suspected the involvement in his brother’s murder of Operation Mongoose members involved in anti-Castro plotting. Jackie suspected LBJ and Secret Service collusion because she saw how Secret Service Agent William Greer had stopped the limo until the fatal shot. French Intelligence concluded LBJ was behind the murder, as did the Kremlin. Members of the Warren Commission itself made private statements disavowing the Lone Nut conclusion. And Lyndon Johnson was recorded at least twice as saying he suspected a conspiracy. Those who dismiss the evidence of conspiracy in JFK’s assassination forget that LBJ himself was a tinfoil hat type, and that the very people in the best position to know all believed in the existence of a conspiracy.We now know the Zapruder Film was altered, and we even know how, who, where, and when. A government-led conspiracy is implicit in the altering of the film. Consequently, this so-called "time-clock" of the assassination isn't reliable. First of all, Zapruder insisted he filmed the motorcade at 24 frames per second. The FBI claims it was filmed at only 18 frames per second, giving the government the opportunity to excise a quarter of the frames from the beginning. The fact that police emergency lights in the film flash erratically, instead of at a set periodicity, shows frames were excised. Superhuman movements, magically disappearing and reappearing motorcycle escorts, a completely immobile crowd of spectators in the foreground, splice marks, and other anomalies prove the film was altered. Eyewitness testimony -- including of those who claim to have seen a different, longer version -- would suggest that what was excised were the overly wide limo turn, LBJ already ducking low in his car, the limo's pause behind the Stemmons Freeway sign, Agent Greer's stopping of the limo between the yellow hash marks painted on the curb, and the nature of the mortal head shot. Why would the film need to be altered at all, except to mask evidence of a conspiracy?In fact, the film gives additional proof of conspiracy, because it shows the mortal shot as driving JFK back and to the left. Not just that, but looking carefully at the margins of the film, we find that beginning at Frame 232, we can actually see the reflection of a sniper firing on the motorcade from atop the County Records Building. The shot that ricocheted off the pavement and struck James Tague in the cheek left a bullet mark aligning, not with the TBSD, but with the County Records Building, which might explain why the mark was quickly cemented over. With millions of pot holes still lining our roads, why the rush to re-pave this artifact of the assassination except to hide evidence, and why hide evidence unless it was of a conspiracy?The monumental dereliction of the Secret Service and its immediate destruction of evidence certainly smacked of foreknowledge and conspiracy. Set aside how the night before many of the agents were out carousing at a strip bar until nearly daylight and a dozen other lapses. We've now seen how agents were waved off of the bumper of the presidential limo just before the last turn onto Elm Street. Even in the altered version of the Zapruder Film, we've seen how Agent Greer slowed down the limo. We have the photographic and expert eyewitness testimony about the bullet hole in the limo's windshield, from the front, despite the efforts of the Secret Service to destroy the evidence immediately by sending the car to Ford Motor Company for a complete makeover. Even the Warren Report noted the presence, in the vicinity of the Grassy Knoll and TBSD, of mysterious men flashing Secret Service credentials, even though the Secret Service said it had no other agents in the area. Isn't that an indication of a possible conspiracy? What about the Secret Service's removal of the body, by force, to Washington, preventing Texas authorities from conducting the investigation, as required by law?Then, of course, there's the medical evidence. A shot in JFK's throat, identified by doctors at Parkland Hospital as having come from the front, was used by them to start a small incision for a tracheotomy. But by the time the body was examined and photographed for autopsy, the wound had taken the ragged appearance of an exit wound. The shot in JFK's back, earlier probed by two FBI agents who found it was shallow, instead was presented by CDR Hume at the autopsy as the entry wound for the "exit" wound in the throat. The angle didn't line up with the Sixth Floor of the TBSD, so artists weren't allowed to see the body; they were told what to depict in their inaccurate autopsy drawings. Similarly, Commission staff misrepresented the location of the wounds in order to expound the Magic Bullet theory. The small entry hole near JFK's hairline was sutured before the autopsy. The large hole in the back of JFK's head, attested to by everyone at Parkland, simply disappeared. Hume burned his autopsy records.Why were multiple sets of x-rays taken, except to help CDR Hume locate, and remove, bullet evidence? A peer-reviewed article by Dr. David Mantik explained how stereoscopic examination of the cranial x-rays, using optical density measurements, showed that an artifact was used to give the appearance that the back of the cranium was still intact. Mantik's study also revealed that a 6.5 mm bullet fragment that had mysteriously appeared in JFK's skull x-rays --apparently to implicate Oswald and "his" Mannlicher-Carcano -- was a forgery. It had been created by means of using photographic double exposure to superimpose the fake bullet onto Kennedy's x-ray, probably by Dr. John Ebersole, the Assistant Chief Radiologist at Bethesda Naval Hospital. Many of the x-rays that were taken are now missing. The duty log page concerning the taking of the x-rays was burned, on the order of Ebersole.Dr. Mantik's results were replicated by other researchers. This is science, not conjecture. Isn't tampering with evidence an indication of possible conspiracy? Oswald didn’t do it. Oswald was dead.At Bethesda Naval Hospital, one of those with his own film of the autopsy was LCDR William Bruce Pitzer. Just as he was retiring from the Navy to take a job with CBS Television, he was found dead in the hospital by a gunshot wound. A pistol lay by his side. Suicide was the ruling. His family didn’t believe it but was pressured by the Office of Naval Intelligence to say nothing. Years later, Lt. Col. Daniel Marvin informed his widow how, as a Green Beret those many years before, he’d turned down a pitch by CIA to assassinate her husband before he could “pass secrets to the enemy.”Who was the enemy? The American people, apparently. Why else is it that 53 years after the assassination, so much of the evidence in the JFK assassination remains under seal at the National Archives for reasons of national security? Is the USG really still protecting its “sources and methods,” or does it simply not want the American people to know the truth behind the assassination?It’s a matter of record that various people impersonated Oswald in Mexico City. How is the impersonation of Oswald in Mexico City proof of anything if not a conspiracy? It could only have been organized by people with knowledge of the CIA’s surveillance of the Soviet and Cuban diplomatic compounds — in other words: the Soviet regime, the Cuban regime, the Mexican government, or the U.S. government. The CIA station in Mexico City transmitted to the FBI the evidence tending to incriminate Oswald and destroyed its recordings of the impersonator shortly afterward, when, in fact, it had been advised by CIA headquarters on October 10 that the impersonator didn't match Oswald's description. That destruction of evidence and transmission of false evidence wasn't by the Soviets, Cubans or Mexicans. It could only have been achieved inside the CIA station in Mexico City. How is it that the USG has no photos of Oswald entering the Soviet and Cuban embassies when CIA had both under 24/7 camera coverage?The phone system in Washington, DC, went down at virtually the exact time as the assassination. We're told it was system overload. Was it just coincidence that most of the Cabinet was on the other side of the world and that a brigade of the 82nd Airborne was en route to the United States? Another coincidence is that rightwing arch-reactionary and Kennedy-hater Air Force Lieutenant General Curtis LeMay had picked that same day to go on a hunting trip to Canada -- someone called a news service to ask about a report his plane had crashed -- but he was quickly able to return to Washington in time to smoke a (celebratory?) cigar while watching the president's autopsy. But it’s awfully hard to imagine it was just coincidence that the nuclear codes were absent from all B-52 crews patrolling our skies that day. Oswald couldn't have accomplished that. Nor could the Mafia, the Cubans, the Soviets or anyone other than elements within the U.S. Government.The Kennedy Assassination is the Rosetta Stone for understanding what became since of the U.S. Government. It was the administration of LBJ, that “American Caligula,” that plotted the false flag attacks in the Tonkin Gulf and against the USS Liberty. It is the same administration that was complicit in the murders of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Sen. Robert Kennedy. And it bred much of what followed. We now know, for example, that Watergate was an effort to suppress evidence in the Kennedy Assassination. Even subsequent events like Waco, Oklahoma City, and especially, 9/11 bear some of the hallmarks of Deep State false flag operations. Each deserves its own separate treatment in future discussions.The Deep State conspiracy continues in broad terms, propelled mostly, perhaps, by bureaucratic inertia, and the institutional drive for self-protection and perpetuation, but also because some of the conspirators did go on to exercise great power and influence that persist to this day.Still don’t believe me? Then ponder this for a moment. Murder and treason have no statute of limitations, Castro is dead, the USSR collapsed 27 years ago, diplomatic relations with Cuba are fully normalized, and yet following up on the murder of the POTUS by an alleged Castro sympathizer isn't even on the bilateral agenda. The murder of a POTUS by a potential Cuban agent… no diplomatic relations with Havana all these years… and yet the USG doesn't even want to follow up on any investigative leads? Anyone who's ever worked for the USG should find that telling, very telling indeed.Remember, the Deep State achieved power through a bipartisan cabal. It will take a bipartisan effort to dethrone it. Many of those “awake” to the existence of the Deep State became so through the efforts of the “Alt Right” media. This is because the so-called mainstream media is under the control of monopolists who are part of the Deep State. The MSM decries the alternate media for “fake news,” and some of it is, but so is much of what the MSM reports as fact.This “awakening” is not solely the purview of the Right, however. Kennedy was a Liberal, in the more classical sense of the term, and, especially by today’s standards, very much a moderate. The Deep State seizure of the USG has led, fundamentally, to an American form of fascism. In Germany, the Nazis won the government and then seized control of the big corporations. In Amerika, the big corporations seized control of the government. The result is basically the same, and the evidence of it is all around us. The United States has now become a surveillance society, perhaps the most technologically sophisticated police state in the world. All Americans must awaken to this fact and act now to save their civil liberties before they are extinguished, perhaps forever.The USG is full of well-meaning, patriotic Americans, but it is not to be trusted, as America’s Founding Fathers always warned. Today’s government is highly compartmentalized and can be leveraged by a few individuals operating in secrecy under the guise of national security. CIA influence reaches deep into all of government. CIA is full of well-meaning, patriotic Americans, too. The United States has a legitimate need for robust intelligence services. But CIA should be splintered as Kennedy vowed, because it is a rogue elephant run amok.The Clintons and Obama were groomed by the Deep State. So were Jeb Bush and other GOP candidates. Whatever one thinks of Pres. Trump, he did achieve the presidency despite its active opposition. This puts him at grave risk, make no mistake about it. The Deep State has been trying for months to assassinate his character. America’s hidden history strongly suggests that failing that, it will turn to Plan B.