Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: Caroline Kennedy, Gianni Agnelli, Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, John F Kennedy, John F. Kennedy assassination, Lee Harvey Oswald, Lyndon B Johnson, White House
Categories : Politics
Jackie Onassis believed that Lyndon B Johnson and a cabal of Texas tycoons were involved in the assassination of her husband John F Kennedy, ‘explosive’ recordings are set to reveal. The secret tapes will show that the former first lady felt that her husband’s successor was at the heart of the plot to murder him. She became convinced that the then vice president, along with businessmen in the South, had orchestrated the Dallas shooting, with gunman Lee Harvey Oswald – long claimed to have been a lone assassin – merely part of a much larger conspiracy.
Texas-born Mr Johnson, who served as the state’s governor and senator, completed Mr Kennedy’s term and went on to be elected president in his own right. The tapes were recorded with leading historian Arthur Schlesinger Jnr within months of the assassination on November 22, 1963, and had been sealed in a vault at the Kennedy Library in Boston. The then Mrs Kennedy, who went on to marry Greek shipping tycoon Aristotle Onassis, had ordered that they should not be released until 50 years after her death, with some reports suggesting she feared that her revelations might make her family targets for revenge. She died 17 years ago from cancer aged 64 and now her daughter, Caroline Kennedy, has agreed to release the recordings early. A program featuring the tapes will be aired by U.S. network ABC, and it is understood British broadcasters are in talks to show it here too. ABC executives claimed the tapes’ revelations were ‘explosive’. They are believed to include the suggestion that Mr Kennedy was having an affair with a 19-year-old White House intern, with his wife even claiming that she found knickers in their bedroom. And they go on to reveal that she too had affairs – one with Hollywood star William Holden and another with Fiat founder Gianni Agnelli – as a result of the president’s indiscretions. It has also been claimed that, in the weeks before Mr Kennedy’s assassination, the couple had turned a corner in their relationship and were planning to have more children. Historian Edward Klein, who has written several books on the Kennedy clan, said: ‘Jackie regarded the pretty young things in the White House as superficial flings for Jack. She did retaliate by having her own affairs. ‘There was a period during which she was delighted to be able to annoy her husband with her own illicit romances.’ It is believed that Caroline, 53, agreed to the early release of the tapes in exchange for ABC dropping its £10million drama series about the family. The Kennedys, starring Tom Cruise’s wife Katie Holmes as Jackie, critically charted the family’s political and personal trials and tribulations since the 1930s. The series was eventually broadcast on an independent cable channel, and on BBC2 in the UK, against Caroline’s wishes. A spokesman for ABC said the claims about the content of the tapes were ‘erroneous’. He said: ‘The actual content of the tapes provide unique and important insight into our recent past from one of the most fascinating and influential First Ladies in American history.’ The broadcaster did not reply to repeated requests for comment and would not clarify what was on the tapes, saying the programme was not scheduled for broadcast until mid-September.
Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: Extremism, Federal Reserve System, Jared Lee Loughner, Joe Biden, Ron Paul, United States, United States Department of Homeland Security, White House
Categories : Constitution, Personal Liberty, Police State Control
A new strategy document released by the White House promises to “closely monitor…the Internet and social networking sites” in order to “counter online violent extremist propaganda” as the federal government attempts to embed itself further in local communities under the guise of preventing domestic extremism. The document, Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism in the United States (PDF), focuses on identifying Americans who have supposedly been radicalized or groomed by Al-Qaeda to carry out attacks in the United States. As the L.A. Times notes, the plan involves “federal departments not usually associated with national security,” and is heavily focused around increasing the federal government’s involvement with schools and the “emotional and behavioral development” of young people. The document defines extremist propaganda as that which is used to “feed on grievances” and “assign blame.” The government vows to “aggressively” combat such ideology by “continuing to closely monitor the important role the internet and social networking sites play in advancing violent extremist narratives.” In targeting the Internet and social networking websites for surveillance in the name of fighting domestic terrorism, the White House is continuing in the vein of the previous administration who in 2006 revealed that since 9/11 they had been pursuing a plan to diminish the role of “conspiracy theories” as a primary recruitment tool for terrorists. The document arrives in the same week that the Pentagon also announced it would be hiring individuals to “detect and track popular ideas on social networks”. Indeed, one such examples amidst many where the federal government monitored the Internet to counter “extremist propaganda” was before protests against the Federal Reserve in 2009 that took place across the United States. After the demonstrations were organized on social networks, the Pentagon released a “Force Protection Advisory” about “planned protests at all Federal Reserve Banks and office locations within the United States,” that was sent to Northcom and the FBI. On November 22, 2008, Alex Jones led a rally at the Federal Reserve Bank in Dallas Texas. The Dallas protest is specifically mentioned in the official Army document. Despite the White House document’s claim that, “opposition to government policy is neither illegal nor unpatriotic and does not make someone a violent extremist,” the Department of Homeland Security has gone out of its way to characterize adversaries of big government as potential domestic terrorists. The MIAC Report, admist a deluge of other training documents released by state and federal authorities (or leaked by whistleblowers), equates Ron Paul supporters, libertarians, people who display bumper stickers, people who own gold, or even people who fly a U.S. flag with radical race hate groups and terrorists. The MIAC report specifically describes supporters of presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, and Bob Barr as “militia” influenced terrorists and instructs the Missouri police to be on the lookout for supporters displaying bumper stickers and other paraphernalia associated with the Constitutional, Campaign for Liberty, and Libertarian parties. A recent DHS promotional video for its See Something, Say Something campaign also overwhelmingly portrayed white middle class Americans as the most likely terrorists. Bizarely, the vast majority of the people seen reporting them to authorities in the 10 minute clip were from ethnic minorities, a theme echoed in the introduction to the White House document which welcomes the “waves of immigrants” who have flocked to the United States. There seems little doubt that the Obama administration is attempting to marginalize its most fervent critics by characterizing them as potentially violent extremists, to the point where Tea Party lawmakers are now being labeled as terrorists by New York Times writers as well as Vice-President Joe Biden. Indeed, numerous Democratic strategists have subtly invited a domestic terror attack blamed on anti-government extremists that President Obama could exploit to rescue his sinking approval ratings. Following Jared Lee Loughner’s shooting spree in Arizona back in January, Politico called on Obama to seize upon his “Oklahoma City moment,” adding that the attack presented a “critical opportunity” to “re-define the nation’s political debate,” a talking point endlessly repeated for weeks that merely became a euphemism for allowing Democrats to exploit the attack to silence critics of big government.
Comments : Leave a Comment »
Tags: Balanced Budget Amendment, Democratic, Harry Reid, John Boehner, Minority leader, Republicans, Senate Democrats, White House
Categories : Economics/Monetary Policy, Politics
As expected, the revised revised Boehner plan has passed the Congress garnering the required 216 votes to be successful (218-210 to be precise). And now that the ball is in the Senate’s court, here is was happens over the next 3 days…Via Nancy Vanden Houten of Stone McCarthy.Majority Leader Reid today set the wheels in motion for the Senate to begin consideration of the House bill, assuming it passes, or his own debt ceiling/deficit reduction plan.Our understanding of the procedures in the Senate is pretty basic, but the bottom line seems to be that the soonest we would see any meaningful vote in the Senate would be shortly after midnight on Saturday (i.e. early Sunday morning.) It’s not clear to us whether that initial vote would be on some version of the House bill, Reid’s original proposal, or Reid’s proposal modified based on recommendations from Minority Leader McConnell. Without
See...we make the american people eat our asses like a giant Cheeseburger.
Republican input on the legislation, the odds of filibuster go up. People with more knowledge of the workings of the Senate than we have are looking for another procedural vote on Monday morning, and a final vote on some piece of legislation on Tuesday (August 2.)Putting the logistics of the Senate aside, Reid is going to have to make some adjustments to his bill to get enough Republican support so that Republicans don’t block legislation through filibusters or other tactics.Assuming Reid can get the Senate to pass some piece of legislation, some compromise will still have to be worked out with the House. If Speaker Boehner wants to be part of a compromise that prevents default, he’s going to have to shift gears in a major way. In the last couple of days, he’s been working overtime to get support for his bill from members of his own party. If he wants to push through compromise legislation, he’s going to have to court some Democrats, because he’ll surely lose Republican votes on any compromise with Democrats.As we noted in our comment Monday, the original Boehner and Reid plans had enough in common to suggest grounds for compromise.The biggest stumbling block will continue to be the House bill’s provision that calls for the debt limit to be increased in two steps, with the first increase only lasting through the end of this year or early this year. We don’t think Senate Democrats and the White House would concede to that. As we noted in our update Monday, both the original House and Senate bills call for a new Congressional committee to make recommendations for long-term deficit reduction. The House bill made the second increase in the debt limit contingent on Congress adopting those recommendations. There are no consequences for failing to adopt the committee’s recommendations in the Senate bill.We think Senate Democrats would agree to adding some mechanism to their bill to force the adoption of the Committee’s recommendations. Indeed, President Obama said today he could support some sort of enforcement mechanism if it was “smart and balanced.” We don’t think Democrats would support the enforcing mechanisms in either version of the House bill — i.e. making a debt limit increase dependent on Congress adopting the new committee’s deficit reduction recommendations in the first bill, or Congress adopting a balanced budget amendment in the latest version. However, Senate Democrats do seem open to requiring a vote on a balanced budget amendment as part of a compromise.The bottom line: To get legislation to raise the debt limit, some bi-partisan cooperation will be required. Senator Reid will need to work with Republicans to move a bill through the Senate, and House Speaker Boehner will need to start wooing Democrats because he’s sure to lose Republican votes for any legislation that makes some concessions to Democrats. Given the procedures in the Senate, this isn’t likely to be resolved before Tuesday. If the two sides are making progress, we think there is a good chance we would see a very short-term increase in the debt ceiling lasting for a matter of days.