1 month before JFK was murdered, he told the LOBBY to register as agents of a foreign government - Goon Squad

I'm going to begin with two words: CUI BONO?

The two words are Latin for "who benefits". I have stated a number of times before, that to solve a majority of crimes committed, you "follow the money". In other words, find out what benefit was derived from the crime, and most likely, you have narrowed down the field of culprits to either: those with motive to benefit from said crime, or those who manifest benefit from said crime.

Remember in GoodFellas, when the boys successfully pull off the Lufthansa heist, but are then warned not to engage in spending habits outside of their normal patterns? Eventually, Jimmy Conway is moved to murder his former colleagues, when each of them defies his wishes and engages in needless opulence?

Israel...consider this your warning from Jimmy.

Greg Bacon says it much better than I do. Read his highly-explosive posting today, "1 month before JFK was murdered, he told the LOBBY to register as agents of a foreign government", and then take a second...and really think about the timing...JFK's refusal to allow Israel nuclear weapons...Executive Order 11110...Jacob [Rubenstein] Ruby's easy access to the basement of the Dallas Police Department holding captive the purported murderer of the President of The United States...and tell me, with conviction, that all of this is just an "unfortunate confluence of events that may or may not implicate Israel and/or J[ewish]I[sraeli]Z[ionist] sympathizers in an act of treason against the United States".

I dare you.

Found this at The Ugly Truth - too good not to share:

Miriam K to Shant Norashkarian:

You are a worthy opponent and it gives me pleasure to enter into dialogue with you because of your obvious intelligence. However, you will derive small satisfaction from my point-by-point refutation of your arguments.

1. Mirian K says: “First, anyone has a “right” to a land if they can grab it. The one who grabs the deckchair has the right to sit on it!”

YOU SAY: Or: “We believe in the law of the jungle, might is right”.

MY RESPONSE: Precisely, Shant. Except we call it “the survival of the fittest” and refer to “natural selection”. Ever heard of Darwin? Winner takes all.

2. Mirian K. says: “By all means choose evil if you find fulfillment therein, but for goodness sake be a bit more discreet about it.”

YOU SAY: Or: “No problem with doing evil as long as you cover it up.”

MY RESPONSE: Evil is a life-style choice, Shant, exactly like abortion. A woman has a choice between having her child or killing it in her womb. Similarly, one has a choice between good and evil, and one must be free to choose the alternative that gives one more personal satisfaction. In the present climate of moral confusion, however, when evil is still regarded as politically incorrect, it is only diplomatic to express a preference for good — i.e., to pretend that there is something inherently wrong with evil as a life-style alternative.

3. Mirian K says: “That’s right, Shant, parade your antisemitism for all to see! Your comment demonstrates your naiveté, you poor little intellectual nincompoop!”

YOU SAY: Or: “When you cannot debate the facts, insult your opponent. Why not use the magic word anti-semitic?”

MY RESPONSE: Good point, Shant. But we Jews rely to a large extent on Talmudic logic for polemical purposes, i.e., on casuistic arguments. Since we are often in the wrong — something we freely admit among ourselves in private — we make extensive use of the ad hominem attack. We utilize ridicule and mockery because these work on the masses much more effectively than logic and sober reason.

4. Miriam K: “Wicked granny, stamping on the guard’s foot as he pushed her into the gas chamber!”

YOU SAY: Or: When you are accused of doing evil never take responsibility.

MY RESPONSE: You make the false assumption that evil is intrinsically inferior to good, whereas both are equally valid life-style choices. Why should one “take responsibility” for the evil one does? Do you take responsibility when you eat beef or chicken for dinner? Wouldn’t the cow or chicken you eat claim you are doing evil by eating it? You kill animals to eat: is that right? We kill Palestinians to survive. Is that wrong?

YOU SAY: Perhaps you should educate yourself of the horrible crimes of your people while you are enjoying the sunny Mediterranean country which was stolen by the terrorists and war criminals who are your current leaders!

MY RESPONSE: Israel is our country now. In 50 years time, who knows? Cling to Christ if you wish, Shant, and see where He leads you. As for us, let us go our way into the darkness where we belong. If there’s a God, let him stop us!

He never stopped the Holocaust. So why should He stop us now if we show Him we mean to do evil with a glad heart in order to spite Him?

— Yes, in order to spite the God that Failed and who Never Existed!

Now you've been given a peek into the thought processes of the "chosen people".

What's Next...Chickens For Colonel Sanders?

Recently discovered two things: the first being hanger steak...apparently, it is just an awesome, heretofore unknown cut of meat (at least, the GF had no bloody idea what it was!), and I did a hell of a job making dinner two Sundays ago.

The second thing I recently discovered was a blog titled Pennsylvania For John McCain. You know...I didn't know that the retarded were allowed to procreate.

Yes...I know. That was unbelievably harsh...but we need to address something very important. I'm going back to 1963 and to the assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy, and I want for you to put on your critical thinking caps. I want for you to think of the possibilities of any "lone nut" assassinating ANY PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE/CANDIDATE - I surmise that you'll agree with me that the possibility is near nil...that is, at least, if all of the spying being performed by our clandestine services are performing in the way that they should - that being ensuring the safety of WE THE PEOPLE, and not merely attempting to stifle lawful dissent to policies designed to undermine and remove our rights as Americans.

So...there's a bit of talk about assassinating the Democratic nominee for the office of the President of the United States. We have actually had successful assassinations...but by whom were they performed? Let's list attempts as well (* denotes that I disagree with the findings):

Andrew Jackson was shot at by Richard Lawrence; both shots misfired

Abraham Lincoln was assassinated by John Wilkes Booth

James A. Garfield was assassinated by Charles J. Guiteau

William McKinley shot twice by Leon Czolgosz; died eight days later

Theodore Roosevelt was shot by John F. Schrank

Franklin Delano Roosevelt was shot by Giuseppe Zangara

Harry S. Truman was shot at by two Puerto Rican pro-independence activists, Griselio Torresola and Oscar Collazo

John Fitzgerald Kennedy's life was threatened by Richard Paul Pavlick; he was later assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald*

Not necessarily pertinent, but being included regardless, Robert Francis Kennedy was killed by Sirhan Bishara Sirhan*

George Wallace was shot by Arthur Bremer; who had previously threatened to assassinate Richard Milhous Nixon; Nixon was also threatened by Samuel Byck

Gerald Ford had two attempts on his life; the first by Lynette "Squeaky" Fromme, the second by Sara Jane Moore

Ronald Reagan was shot by John Hinckley, Jr.*

George Herbert Walker Bush was said to have been threatened by sixteen men in the alleged employment of Saddam Hussein, in retaliation for Gulf War the First; attack foiled by Kuwaiti officials

William Jefferson Clinton was said to have been threatened first by Frank Eugene Corder, who flew a single-engine Cessna into the White House; Francisco Martin Duran fired at least 29 shots with a semi-automatic rifle at the White House

George Walker Bush was supposedly threatened by Robert Pickett, who shot at the White House; Vladimir Arutyunian attacked him with a hand grenade - amazingly, the handkerchief used to obfuscate its appearance delayed the explosion

So...that was a mouthful. There are events that I dispute occurred as recorded; please feel free to write in and challenge my discernments - any and all arguments are welcome.

So...I did bring up a lot of distasteful memories for some...but there's a reason I've done so, and I could have begun and ended with JFK's assassination...and that point is THIS:

There is no bloody way that what occurred in 1963 could EVER recur in this, these modern times. There are simply too many media devices being used by everyday people - if we possessed this level of technology back in 1963, we would never have heard of Dan Rather...Abraham Zapruder would simply have been one of a cast of thousands to have captured the footage of the day; I daresay that the attempt may have been forestalled with the advent of personal media recording devices.

At the very least, Thane Eugene Cesar would either be rotting away in prison or feeding worms for his role in the assassination of RFK.