All Episodes
Previous Next
April 26, 2018 - Jim Fetzer
01:04:58
The New JFK Show #182 John Hanky

Dr. Jim Fetzer, Larry Rivera, Don Fox and Gary King welcome John Hankey

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
In Dallas, Texas, three shots were fired at President Kennedy's motorcade.
That's what we were told.
Most Americans never believed Lee Oswald was the lone gunman, for excellent reasons.
In fact, there were at least six shooters who fired from eight to ten shots or more who are identified here.
We have, finally, the solution to the greatest murder mystery in history, laid out for the world to see proof after proof after proof.
Photos were faked, the body was changed, x-rays were altered, the home movies were fixed.
Fifteen experts contribute to a 529-page book with 1,037 photos and diagrams in black and white and color.
Hi, this is Gary King.
If you'd like JFK, who, how, and why, and would like to support the new JFK Show, then go to PatriotRadioBooks.com.
That's PatriotRadioBooks.com.
All right.
Welcome to the new JFK show number 182.
Now, do we have a loaded crew tonight?
Larry Rivera, John Hanke, Don Fox, Jim Fetzer, and Gary King sitting right in the engineer's chair right now.
You didn't mention Larry Rivera.
Yeah, I did.
I did.
Yeah, he was first.
He was first.
All right, so tonight what we have, we're going to have what Larry calls a rabbit chasing session.
Which he was talking about a teacher from way back in high school, so I hope we understand what he's talking about, chasing rabbits.
But, um, so that's basically... Hey, Garrett, going down the rabbit hole, really?
Yeah, really chasing rabbits, so... He doesn't mean chasing cats.
I thought he was about chasing the teacher for a moment there, but I think I understand now.
Yeah.
All right.
Okay, so what we're going to do, we had a very, very good show last week.
It was about Kennedy and the Treasury Notes.
Now what we're going to do, we're going to tail off of that, and then we're going to go chasing rabbits, where we're going to talk about basically anything we want.
But I'd like to set the tone right now, so I'm going to go ahead and hit screen share.
And before we do that, I have something for you guys to see.
It's called, I call it jamming with the CIA.
This is St.
John, huh?
Yeah, that's when they were in New Orleans.
And you see my little female drummer at the bottom there?
Great singer.
And my buddy here.
And they had some more people on the other side.
And there's McGillen.
What is it?
You see him right there?
I forgot his name.
Chris?
So St.
John said good with the guitar?
Oh, yeah.
He's a hell of a guitar player.
Yeah.
And there's the publisher on the left, all the way at the left.
Looks like the bartender.
Hey, Chris Mulligan?
Yeah, that's who he is, right there.
Chris Mulligan, you got it.
All right, what we're going to do, fellas, we're going to go back in time.
We're going to go back to, actually, March 22nd, 2013, when Dr. James Fessler was interviewing Bill Still, and they're going to discuss the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Notes and John Kennedy.
But this is just an audio?
Just audio.
Well, that's wonderful.
You've been very active in getting the word out.
I think that's absolutely sensational.
My understanding is the Founding Fathers advocated against a central bank.
They thought it would be inimical to freedom and democracy here in the United States, and therefore they opposed its founding, and yet it occurred in the debt of 1913, as I recollect.
Well, it depends on how you define a central bank.
I mean, there are different kinds of so-called central banks.
The way I like to define it is a bank controlled by the Treasury and run in the public interest, such as Canada had from the 1930s to about 1972, such as the way Guernsey, the Isle of Guernsey, has dealt with their Treasury.
Such as the United States, such as the U.S.
Congress did during the Revolution and a few years thereafter until the British central bankers moved in and finally got America to start incurring their form of central bank with the First Bank of North America, then the First Bank of the United States, the Second Bank of the United States, which was killed by Andrew Jackson.
Killed so well that it took them 70 some years to finally
And of course the Federal Reserve is actually a consortium of private banks where various political figures including even JFK as president believed that it was absurd that the United States should be paying interest to a private consortium for printing the currency of the United States and therefore directed the Treasury to undertake that assignment, which greatly antagonized them.
Have you paid special attention to this episode, this aspect of the Federal Reserve's history?
Well, yes, I have.
When we first did the Money Masters, and that was before the Internet, so we had to actually do this research painstakingly in three days' time in the Library of Congress.
Well, JFK's story is nothing but an urban myth.
It has absolutely no basis in reality.
Kennedy was an internationalist.
He never mentioned anything about wanting to restore U.S.
notes.
The executive order in question, Executive Order 11110, if you actually read it, it's very short, refers only to transferring authority from the President to the Secretary of Treasury for the pre-issuance of silver certificates.
Which had absolutely no consequence because they were about to do away with silver certificates because the price of silver had risen above a dollar a ounce.
This is very strange.
As a young Marine Corps officer, I held a United States note in my hand.
It had a red embossed imprint and it said United States note rather than green embossed imprint saying Federal Reserve note.
I'm really rather taken aback, Bill, by your denial of what appears to me to be the historical reality.
Well, read Executive Order 11110.
It's very short.
You can Google it in short order.
Bill, I held this note in my hand.
So?
So you're telling me that it was not a United States note and that Jack wasn't moving away from the Fed?
Of course it was a United States note.
See, United States notes were reprinted 11 different times throughout history.
They're nothing but Lincoln's old greenbacks reprinted 11 different times in the last time just All right, I think that's a good place to stop right there.
They are in fact still legal tender.
Their legal tender status was never removed.
However, in 1994 with the Regal Act, Congress made it so that United States notes would no longer be reprinted.
So there was never a 12th reprinting. - All right, I think that's a good place to stop right there. - Did you say that was Bill Steele? - Bill Steele, yeah.
I like Bill Still.
I forget when I did this interview, when was it?
That was May 22nd, 2013.
2013.
Alright, so what I believe about this is that the only difference as far as the Treasury notes is that they were circulated.
And Don, am I right that they actually, before that, put the notes in a circulation vault where they Circulated in this one room and the only difference is that JFK actually had the notes circulated.
Am I right about that?
Yeah, I can't find like an order where Kennedy said, hey, we got to put these notes out, but they did.
They appeared under in the Kennedy era.
And then, you know, by the 80s, somebody had interviewed, you know, Piper with the Spotlight Magazine interviewed that one functionary.
I'd have to pull that up again.
But he said, yeah, all the notes now are in a circulation vault.
Or it's ordered by Congress that these things need to circulate, but they just sit in a locked up vault and that counts as being in circulation.
In other words, it's a joke.
Yeah, correct.
Yeah.
I know we've got John Hanke to talk about this, so... Yeah, so John, the question that it has been of late is that, was John Kennedy a globalist?
And what I wanted you to explain is about the disarming of the United States and how they actually did it in Germany and Japan.
So go ahead, John.
Well, okay.
I'm not sure how all of these relate, but it doesn't matter.
We're free as a rabbit.
We can run anywhere we want.
But I want to start off, I think I want to start off by saying that, you know, you can, people do point to any number of reasons for Kennedy to have been out of favor with the men who killed him.
And the Federal Reserve notes is one, and civil rights is another, and I think on and on and on.
But it's my observation, and I don't want to fight over this or even make a big deal out of it, but it's my observation that you hear Fletcher Prouty talk about how Kennedy sent McNamara and Taylor to Vietnam, and when they came back, Kennedy handed them the report that they were supposed to be writing,
and in fact it was Prouty and Krulak who had written it at JFK's and in fact it was Prouty and Krulak who had written it at JFK's direction, and it was going to be completely out of Vietnam by the end of 1965, and Prouty mentions that they worded it that the military would be out, and they handed it to Kennedy, and Kennedy said, I want everybody out.
And so they had to reword it, and they did reword it, so that it said not only all of the military, but all the ancillary personnel.
I'm going to throw in right here, you don't find that wording in the existing NSAM-263.
Crowdy talks about it, he's very, very clear about it, he's talked about it on probably 20 occasions, but somebody went and dug into Maxwell Taylor's papers and found a directive that Maxwell Taylor wrote on October 6th, the same day, using exactly the same language that Crowdy describes, that all U.S.
personnel, it doesn't use the word military, all U.S.
personnel, including all ancillary personnel, We'll be out of Vietnam by the end of 65.
NSAM 263 is dated on the 6th, and this Maxwell Taylor memo, with exactly the wording that Prouty describes, is also dated October 6th, and seven days later, B. Harvey Oswald got a job at the School Book Depository.
So it's my observation that it's the war in Vietnam and Kennedy's decision to end the war in Vietnam Now, of course, the banks and the Federal Reserve were not shedding any tears when the President was killed, but what I want you to talk about is Kennedy discussing about the United Nations taking over the military, other than the internal policing.
Sure.
Well, it's in Actually, I was discussing with Gary that I'm not positive that it's in JFK 2.
It may be something that I discovered just shortly before I put out Dark Legacy.
Kennedy's speaking at the United Nations, and at the United Nations, he calls for the abolition.
I'm trying to get the exact word in my head, and it's not coming up.
He doesn't use the word abolition, but he says that they are going to The Russians, starting that afternoon, he says, are going to meet and begin discussing about the reduction in arms until they have eliminated all armies and all weapons except as needed for domestic policing, that the U.S.
and Russia are going to be out of the international warfare game.
And I mentioned to Gary that while that may seem like a radical notion, The Germans and the Japanese were absolutely banned from... Yeah, they did it in Germany!
They did it in Germany and in Japan!
And with what result?
It was fabulous, right?
In the 1980s and 1990s, the Japanese and the Germans, I think by any measure, had the most powerful, most successful economies on the face of the Earth, right?
While the U.S.
manufacturing base was collapsing, the Germans and the Japanese were surging because they weren't taking such a huge portion of their available investing potential, and they were taking theirs and putting it into modernizing their steel and automobile production, and so both of those countries still today have a very, very strong, powerful domestic automobile manufacturing base, and the United States, as near as I can tell, has none.
I know that Los Angeles used to have five automobile plants and three steel plants and four rubber plants, and they now have none.
I presume that The situation is similar, but anyway, the final point is that given what the U.S.
did in Vietnam, given what the U.S.
did in Iraq and Afghanistan, given our inclination to go in and slaughter people massively and really randomly, that we ought to be barred from participation militarily in international affairs.
In other words, we'd already demonstrated that we really didn't need an army to The way we were going with Vietnam and the previous wars.
Am I right about that?
Well, and you know, that's what Eisenhower said.
And it struck me that Eisenhower giving a speech against the military-industrial complex is a little bit like Kennedy issuing these greenbacks.
It's an indication of what their thinking is.
Eisenhower was a complete slave to the military-industrial complex, and he certainly never expanded that would have in any way impinged on their ability to dominate the U.S.
political machine, but he said it, and Kennedy didn't say anything about the notion, the really fundamental notion, and you know, when you talk about banking, I think it's an incredibly important notion today, and it has always been.
The ability of any governmental institution to issue low or zero interest loans to public works, right?
If for infrastructure, for somebody wants to build a factory and make jobs for 10 million people, that you give them a low interest, no cost loan in order to promote them doing it.
You don't make them go begging to the banks.
And that's been an issue, I think, for since the 1920s at least.
But the point is, Kennedy didn't say anything about it, but he did this minor thing.
Eisenhower said the thing about the military and industrial complex, but he didn't do anything.
Kennedy gave this major speech at the United Nations, and in fact, I found a couple of weeks ago, maybe a week ago, the U.S.
and the Russians signed an agreement to eliminate their militaries, to begin a process that would result in the final and complete elimination of their All right, let's have Dr. Fetcher join in.
Isn't that fascinating?
This is wonderful stuff you're reporting here, John.
Let me just ask the following question.
It looks to me as though given the difficulty you had finding the proper version of that I mean, of course it is.
Security Action Memorandum that they might have also destroyed an order had JFK issued one to print the United States notes.
Is that a possibility?
Of course it is.
It's totally plausible.
I think you're coming up with some real gems here.
I love it.
I'm fascinated by it.
And that Maxwell Taylor's records were intact is a very good thing.
Well, it's just that one page that was intact.
You know, there's any number of parallels.
Yeah, move your camera down so we can see you a little better there, John.
Say it again?
Yeah, just center.
That's good.
You did it.
Perfect.
Um, one of the parallels that keeps striking me is that the autopsy, right?
We're showing a tiny hole in the back of JFK's head, right?
How reliable is that?
It certainly is as official a government document as anything that you can imagine or name, right?
It's just high security.
You would think that it's something that would have been held in You know, the people would have paid a lot of attention to ensure the accuracy of, and so on, and so on, and so on, and so on.
And that's a complete fraud.
And I would argue that NSAM 263 is a similar fraud.
That they changed, I think it's very clear, that they changed the wording in that to eliminate what had said that they should withdraw the complete All Americans, all U.S.
forces, including ancillary personnel.
That's the wording, I think, exactly from the Taylor memo.
And they altered that to say, to withdraw the bulk of forces.
And I think that you could ask any soldier in Afghanistan now whether withdrawing the bulk of forces means getting out of Afghanistan.
And they would agree wholeheartedly that it does not.
Good point.
Larry?
Oh yeah, yeah, yeah.
Like Jim said, I'm fascinated by the subject at hand.
I would like to add to what John has said.
In order to understand JFK's position on Vietnam, you have to go back to the early 50s as a junior congressman.
He went to Vietnam and he saw how the French had gotten bogged down.
in Indochina and he, especially everything like Dien Bien Phu, and so he was very familiar with Vietnam.
So he knew that a war there was not winnable, that the structure of the North and South was such that there was just no way that any imperial power Could do anything there except exploit the country.
And that's why, you know, when people talk about JFK and his position on Vietnam and they doubt that, I think that's ridiculous because JFK was on record, you know, he knew what, you know, how the French had, what they had been through in Vietnam and the French just left Vietnam.
So, you know, it's a no brainer as far as I'm concerned and I agree with John.
Done.
Okay so all right we'll come back to Vietnam I think maybe in a minute but you know the question was was JFK a globalist?
And my contention was as I shot out the email earlier in the week was that globalism is a Jewish construct and JFK was not Jewish.
And here I'm on myjewishlearning.com and it says quote Jews, it's true, played an outsized role in the creation of systems that gave rise to modern corporate capitalism, which is the economic force behind contemporary globalization.
The unprecedented flow of capital and commerce across international borders and the accompanying monoculture that espouses personal fulfillment and material advancement as the highest values.
A World Jewish Congress paper published in 2001 notes that Jews, quote, have always supported globalization.
Jewish existence in the diaspora has been based for hundreds of years on globalization, and in many periods it has been the Jews who supported and spread the concept.
In reliance on their ability to build international ties, connecting different diaspora communities, the Jews have always promoted globalization and have served as its agents.
Has this had anything to do with their not having a state of their own in the past?
That's what they're saying, yeah, because we don't have a homeland, so we're gonna make the world our home.
Yeah, and then we're gonna promote a monoculture, so we're gonna destroy your culture, and we're going to replace it with a culture that espouses personal fulfillment and material advancement as the highest values.
I want to return to a point John was making in passing about banking.
We have one state in the Union that has a state-owned bank that makes loans at no interest to the citizens of that state, and that is in North Dakota.
Which has the best, the most sound economy of any of the 50 states.
I think it would be a wonderful model for the other states to emancipate ourselves from endless debt to bankers.
Where, you know, it has been said that compound interest is the greatest evil ever designed by the mind of man.
I'm very much inclined to believe that.
If you just look at the national debt, most of that in fact is an imaginary number by compounding interest based upon a debt purportedly owed to the Federal Reserve for printing our money.
I mean, what could be more stupid than an arrangement like that?
Whereas JFK perceived, it has always seemed to me, It was totally unnecessary, the government has the printing capacity, it has a legal authority to print its own money, and the creation of the Fed was one of the monster mistakes, but of course it was deliberately designed that has haunted the American people since that fateful occasion in 1913.
All right, so what I want to say is, I don't think you have to be a total globalist like Don is saying to help their causes.
I don't think Donald Rumsfeld was actually, you know, a bell ringer, let's say.
But what I want to say is that it appears to me that John F. Kennedy was pushing United Nations agendas.
I think was very much thinking on global scale until the day came that The generals wanted to have a preemptive strike on Russia, and they also wanted to scorch Cuba.
And from that point forward, I think it's a day, as John has pointed out, that John F. Kennedy was basically born again that day.
He was all for more militarization, and Russia was the big enemy and things like that.
But all of a sudden, when they wanted to completely kill an entire island off, and Believing they can win a preemptive nuclear strike is when John Kennedy realized that these bastards had a collective death wish for the world.
And then he started moving against Allen Dulles and Charles Cabell.
And from then on, I think he really decided to fight these people and realize who they are.
But they also, he was preventing them from getting nuclear weapons as well.
So they had plenty of reason.
Bear in mind, in the 1950s, in the early days of the United Nations, it was regarded as the solution to world peace.
It had the potential to bring about harmonious relations between nations.
I believed it when I was a young man.
I mean, it was something that was very much Present at the time.
I'm talking now, I of course was born in 1940.
I was living through this in the 1950s.
The UN was founded what, around the same time as the CIA, as a national around 1948?
I mean, I'm telling you, at the time The United Nations really was an ideal entity, and I am not remotely skeptical that Jack believed up to a certain point in the United Nations and its potential to bring about better relations among the nations of the world.
I have no doubt about it at all.
I also believe completely, Gary, what you're describing.
I recall his walking out of that meeting saying to his, may have been Bobby or another aide, and we call ourselves the human race.
I mean, he was totally disillusioned.
I think it was an event that was traumatic for him intellectually and completely disillusioning.
Yeah, Larry, what do you think about scorching Cuba from one end to the other?
Well, we all know that JFK sealed his fate at the American University speech where he mentioned peace and, you know, Living, you know, in peace with Cuba and the Soviet Union.
So, you know, that's just something that it's there.
You know, we always tell, you know, our kids, you know, when we talk to them about the JFK assassination, just go to YouTube and listen to American University speech.
And where we all breathe the same air, we all cherish our children's future.
I mean, I mean, that's I think that's right there.
It wraps everything up.
Yeah, he had a vision.
John?
Well, I'm listening to all this stuff and I find nothing to disagree with in particular.
Let me say that... Oh, jeez.
Say it anyway you want.
The Rothschilds...
invented an international banking conspiracy.
Now, one of the ideas that's banging around in my head is that I think Christianity is a good thing, but I don't think that the control of the world by the Vatican is a good thing.
And if you think that Christianity means that the Pope gets to dictate to the entire globe what the mores and morals are going to be for everyone, then you could be against Christianity, right?
I could go on and on and on of black, dark, horrible examples that have been carried out by people who called themselves Christian that have been used to then, you know, destroy the name and reputation of Christianity, on the other hand.
Right, it doesn't sound like such a terrible thing.
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you is not such a terrible approach to life.
No matter whether you're Islamic or Buddhist or agnostic or atheist, it's still a good approach to life.
Now then, international banking conspiracies, or international business conspiracies, I think, for that matter, but particularly the bankers, those guys have been globalists and successful, powerful globalists at least.
Yes, they united Europe to destroy democracy in France, right?
I really think it goes back to that point, that with the French Revolution, and Jim Mars talks about this, so I'm going to run on for a minute.
With the French Revolution, you had every aristocracy, every royal kingdom in Europe attacked France one at a time, and the Rothschilds yelled and screamed and roared and
tried to get them to all act at once and it took them 30 years and after 30 years they finally got everybody many of these guys who hated each other and had for a hundred years to to show up at Waterloo on the same day and they Napoleon kicked their asses for the first five hours when he was only outnumbered five to one but in the afternoon the rest of the guys showed up and he was outnumbered ten to one
And he surrendered, and Mars makes the observation that when they finished attacking democracy and destroying democracy in France, and when they succeeded in putting an aristocrat back on the throne in France, that they then turned their sights on the United States, to see what they could do to destroy democracy in the United States.
And Mars suggested, and boy, once you look at it, it's all there!
that they instigated the civil war in order to be able to tell the people of Europe, look at what happens when you have democracy.
You have these insanely bloody, you know, internecine fighting because that's what democracy is.
If you just put that every, right, if you have primogeniture, if you put all the power in the hands of this one family that's responsible for looking out for everybody, you then don't have civil war.
So these, So, you have international conspiracies, and you can call that globalism if you want.
Or, on the other hand, you have the inspired notion that people came out of the end of World War II, and they came out of the end of World War I with the same inspired notion.
I've developed a much more, what's the word, developed a lot of admiration for Woodrow Wilson's good intentions.
That I had when I knew less about him and what he was about.
But anyhow, Roosevelt had all these good intentions for what the United Nations was going to do.
And you know, anybody can sit back and say, oh yes, you can see what potential the United Nations could have if it wasn't controlled by an international banking conspiracy.
You're absolutely right about that.
We're going to take a break.
This is JFK number 182.
Don Fox, hold on.
Hang tight.
I can see you're starting to steam at the ears.
We'll be right back.
In Dallas, Texas, three shots were fired at President Kennedy's motorcade.
That's what we were told.
Most Americans never believed Lee Oswald was the lone gunman, for excellent reasons.
In fact, there were at least six shooters who fired from eight to ten shots or more who are identified here.
We have, finally, the solution to the greatest murder mystery in history, laid out for the world to see proof after proof after proof.
Photos were faked, the body was changed, x-rays were altered, the home movies were fixed.
Fifteen experts contribute to a 529-page book with 1,037 photos and diagrams in black and white and color.
Hi, this is Gary King.
If you'd like JFK, who, how, and why, and would like to support the new JFK Show, then go to PatriotRadioBooks.com.
That's PatriotRadioBooks.com.
All right, welcome back to the new JFK Show, number 182.
I think it's the second or third time we have Jon Henke on, one of my favorite guests.
We've got Larry, Jim, Don, and myself, and we're gonna go ahead and let Don respond to some of this stuff.
Okay, so, okay, first point.
The French Revolution was Jewish.
Okay, that was, it's right straight out of the Protocols of Zion.
You know, right here, Protocol 1, you know, we shall end liberty.
In all corners of the earth, the words liberty, equality, fraternity brought to our ranks, thanks to our blind agents, whole legions who have worn our banners with enthusiasm.
Well, that was, that was the slogan of the French Revolution.
So that was Jewish.
The so-called Russian Revolution, that was all Jews behind that.
Trotsky, Lenin, Bronstein.
You know, yeah, Lev Bronstein is Trotsky's real name.
You know, these guys were all Marx.
These are all Jews.
They overthrew all the governments basically in Europe.
They replaced the aristocracy.
And we get down to protocol three here.
We support communism.
So, Communism is Jewish.
Under our guidance, the people under our guidance have annihilated the aristocracy, who were their one and only defense and foster mother for the sake of their own advantage, which is inseparably bound up with the well-being of the people.
Nowadays, with the destruction of the aristocracy, the people have fallen into the grips of merciless money-grinding scoundrels who have laid a pitiless and cruel yoke upon the necks of the workers.
The French Revolution, the Russian Revolution, all this stuff is straight out of the protocols.
But Don, Don, I mean there were historical circumstances in particular in relation to the French Revolution where the people were really impoverished.
It seems to me we're doing something like replicating the circumstances of the French Revolution right here in the United States of America.
Actually, no, that's kind of a lie.
The people were doing pretty well under the old feudal system, and then communism, the French Revolution was brought to us by the Freemasons, and the Illuminati, which was all Jewish.
You know, I'll dig up, I've got some documents on here.
So is this an argument for bringing back feudalism to the United States, because we're doing a pretty good job of it?
Well, democracy has been a disaster.
For white people, let's face it.
We were 30% of the world's population in 1900.
We're less than 9% of the world's population today.
Yeah, but that's evolution and demographics and, Don, I mean, you know.
I think it has more to do with commercials on TV.
I think that's more to do with the interracial commercials on TV.
Oh, it is stunning.
I notice them all the time.
They don't have a mixed-race couple on TV.
They don't have an ad.
That's it.
Jesus was Jewish.
No, he was not Jewish, John.
That's a huge lie.
Jesus was not Jewish.
That was the point.
But I would be interested to hear you say, please explain to me because I need to be educated on this point, What is wrong with either or all three?
Liberty, equality, and fraternity.
Which of those do you regard as particularly vile?
Well, John, what it is is it's a slogan.
It's an empty slogan.
Well, it doesn't have to be an empty slogan.
Well, of course it was.
It was an empty slogan that they used to sucker the populace into fighting their battle.
Does it have to be?
Does it have to be an empty slogan?
Is it a bad slogan?
No, but let's look at reality.
How did it play out?
It was an empty slogan that got the people to rise up against the aristocracy, which actually protected them from the international Jewish cabal.
I see.
Which is what it states right in the protocols, John.
Have you read the protocols?
But bear in mind, Don, some of your arguments have the character that Jews approve X, therefore X is Jewish.
If Jews approve birth control, that wouldn't mean birth control was Jewish.
It is.
Abortion is Jewish.
I know lots of Jews love Christmas.
Well, that would mean some Jewish things are actually good things or desirable.
I mean, you know, I think family planning is eminently rational.
That parents should be able to determine when they have kids, how many kids they have.
You have to look at the actual outputs of the system.
And all these concepts sound wonderful.
Hey, we're going to all be equal.
We're all going to have this wonderful life.
You have to look at how... Diversity!
Play out in reality.
The final output is what you need to judge these things by, not by the bullshit that... The slogan?
Yes.
I have another question I'd like to put out if nobody minds.
Go, please do.
It's been one of my... It strikes me, and I'm particularly interested to hear what Don has to say about this, but in reading All this stuff and delving deeper and deeper and deeper into the roots of the Vietnam War and John Kennedy's attempts to get us out of it.
And, you know, people were talking about the evidence.
I think there's at least 15 witnesses, people who knew him well and personally, who said, oh yeah, he said he was absolutely going to have the U.S.
out.
I get this vision in my head of The National Security State.
And in my mind, the vision that keeps coming back to me is this castle that sits on the top of the hill, and that down below the castle is this village of peasants and villagers.
And, you know, the villagers produce all the food, and the villagers produce all of the implements.
They produce all of the clothing, they produce all of the shoes, they produce everything of value.
And these guys, the aristocracy, sitting up in the castle on the top of the hill, then, you know, I would say it's only an observation to say that they are parasites that live off of the community that they rule.
It's not remotely clear what their contribution is in that situation, except the sole justification Those guys in the castle on the hill is the national security threat.
If you're not worried about the Huns racing in over the horizon and raping and pillaging everybody, if you're not worried about the... Then the whole thing doesn't work.
If you don't have that fear, then the whole thing falls apart.
Well, there's absolutely no... There's no justification.
Yeah, the Fletcher Party said that.
Without the threat of war, Then the whole thing falls apart.
And not only that, which I want to talk about next week, if I get my show together, it's called The Report from Iron Mountain.
When Fletcher talked about these men that were told to go inside this bomb-proof shelter and come out with a substitution for war.
How, what do we do to maintain all of our power without war?
And they thought about it and they actually came out with the environment, pollution, how if you don't, um, you know, if we don't do this and give up that and give up the other, then, you know, the environment will kill us all.
Okay.
So that's the report from Iron Mountain that I was talking about.
Or we'll kill the environment and then suffer the consequences.
Right.
So that's how they plan to control us without war.
And, um, But that's certainly a desirable alternative, wouldn't you suggest?
Oh yeah, a lot fewer people die, you know.
But the quality of life would be enhanced.
Yeah, well they're trying to implement it now with the carbon credits and every, see in California with the fires, do you know that the chief, or the fire chief, All these days after has not determined how the fire happened.
He doesn't want to talk about directed energy weapons and the ground being contaminated with aluminum particles?
No, what I wanted to talk about is how the people that cannot go back home to their land is because of environmental laws.
And so that's what I'm saying, that they have already implemented The pollution, environmental aspect of it all, you know, climate change.
Yeah, but you're saying this is a way of theft of appropriation of private property by means of environmental protection laws.
Yeah, and maintaining their control over everything in the name of protecting the environment.
I mean, the homes that were destroyed were high-quality homes for the most part.
I mean, many of them were very impressive mini-estates.
Multi-million dollars.
Not just multi-million dollars, but things happen to them that don't happen normally.
The engine block does not melt.
Okay, well you got a Dodge Ram and it's got a big old V8 in there.
It does not melt like the witch in the Wizard of Oz.
And I'm not joking about that because I do know people that live out there and most of the people are not going to qualify for what's necessary to get a loan to move back into their property.
So it's a huge, huge land theft and it's through environmental laws that they're not going to be able to go back.
California is very peculiar in many different ways, and having been born and raised there, of course.
It's a strange place.
I don't know where I speak.
Gary, listen, Gary, there were lots of fires in California.
There were fires in Santa Barbara that wiped out.
Yeah, I'm talking about the ones that were melting tires and engines.
Well, that's all of them, but Mendocino is another place that was hit.
And it, you know, it so happens I drove through Mendocino this summer.
I'm talking about the ones in the Napa Valley, around there.
No, no, no.
Go ahead, John.
Go ahead.
That's Mendocino.
But we drove through it this summer, and I was scared to death because it was so hot and so dry that, you know, it just seemed like if there was a spark, oh man, and it's this narrow, windy road.
And it took us 40 minutes to go about 10, 12 miles.
And if there was a fire moving 40 miles an hour, we'd have got caught in it and been no way out.
But the fires in Santa Barbara were very, very different in some ways, and very, very similar in other ways, but I'd be interested to ask Gary.
See, I grew up in Los Angeles, and I got bad lungs from growing up in Los Angeles.
And I don't know if you've driven behind a car in the 1960s lately, but in Los Angeles, the air used to be so horrible, and it's so much better now than it was, and My wife and I, we went out and we got solar panels and we bought a Chevy Volt for $13,000 and I went to put gas in it for the first time in six months and I couldn't remember where the gas tank was.
And I bought two gallons of gas because two gallons of gas is going to last us another several months and I'm just delighted to not Yeah, right.
I'm so happy.
Did you say that was a Chevrolet?
Did you say that?
Yeah, it was a Chevy Bolt.
Wow!
Well, it was two years old.
We got it for $13,000, two years old.
But it burns gas, so you never run out.
And it's just astonishing to me how little effort I have put in to go completely petroleum-free.
But I don't, you know, the next time you drive into a gas station, pay attention to the poisons that you're surrounded by, and I don't have to do that.
I almost don't care whether global warming is real or any of these other things are real.
I have, I'm so far away from petroleum, and I'm so glad to be there.
Larry, go ahead.
Yeah, Larry, talk to us.
No, no, I'm just fascinated by the subject because fossil fuels are killing the earth and the technology is already in place to substitute that and the powers that be do not want that to happen.
Gone.
Okay, I just wanted to make one final point on the aristocracy versus democracy or whatever the hell you want to call it.
So here's what it says, again out of the protocols.
We appear on the scene as alleged saviors of the worker from this oppression when we propose to him to enter the ranks of our fighting forces.
Socialists, anarchists, communists, To whom we always give support in accordance with an alleged brotherly rule of the solidarity of all humanity, of our social masonry.
The aristocracy, which enjoyed by law the labor of the workers, was interested in seeing that the workers were well-fed, healthy, and strong.
We are interested in just the opposite.
In the diminution, the killing out of the... They say that?
They say they're interested in just the opposite?
Yes.
Well, I don't think Don has a legitimate document, that's what I think.
I do think we need to do a show on the Goyim.
It says they want to kill the Goyim, and then what happened?
The Goyim, this was written in probably 1897, and the Goyim population was 30% of the earth.
Now it's down to less than nine.
So is it bullshit or is it legit?
It's bullshit.
I'll be the first to tell you.
And the thing is, but it's very, very well crafted.
I'd love to debate you on the legitimacy of the protocols, Johnson.
We'll bring you back!
We'll do it!
We're here now!
Hang on, I go to the library, I go down there, I get out this big book, I go through all this trouble, and I get my hands on NSAM 263, and it's a fraud!
You hear what I'm telling you?
NSAM 263 is a fraud!
And I'm telling you, that book that you have in your hand, I'm not saying that there isn't a Protocols of Zion, I'm not saying that there wasn't one, and I'm not saying that there isn't one, but I'm saying that the one that you have is crafted to get you to root against your allies And to get you to root in favor of, just to see the aristocracy as the good guys?
The aristocracy!
People used to die in Europe every summer by the tens of thousands of plagues.
Of plagues, because... Okay, John, the Russian peasants... I'm almost done, I'm almost done.
Because there was no public sanitation, there was no public education, there was no public roads, there were no public fire departments, no public police department, all of those public things.
Oh my God, that's socialism!
Well, goddamn, you know, let's hear it for socialism, because let's hear it for... That's right, I agree with that.
Let's hear it for socialism, indeed.
...Russian peasants under the communist rule, where 30 to 60 million of them were starved out by the commies.
The Russian czar didn't starve them out.
The people loved them.
He did.
Are you... he... okay.
He... he... listen... The Stalinist purge?
How many people... After World War I, All of these aristocracies across Europe fell to democracy because the people of Europe blamed... They fell to Jewry.
They didn't fall to democracy.
I'm sorry?
They fell to international Jewry.
They fell because they were blamed for World War I. It was the observation of the masses of people of Europe that the aristocracies Started World War I and continued World War I and killed, I don't know, 50 million people, 40 million certainly, in World War I and didn't suffer any of the consequences.
They started it for no reason.
Jews were behind World War I. I'm sorry?
Jews were behind World War I. They got... Did you say the Jews were behind World War I?
Yes, Rothschilds were behind World War I. I've never heard that.
Well, the Balfour Declaration, let's take a look at that.
What does that got to do with World War I?
Well, what was the net result of World War I?
What came out of it?
Well, the Russian Revolution came out of it.
The aristocracy in Italy fell.
The aristocracy in Spain fell.
Where else were there aristocracies?
Are we detecting a pattern here?
Well, when aristocracies like we have in the United States, for example, just run wild and commit atrocities, well, they take actions that are careless because they don't suffer any of their consequences.
They find themselves getting booted out on their asses.
To me, that's the observable pattern.
What we got here, Larry?
Yeah, since we're doing rabbit chasing, I wanted to Show you guys this memo that my dad's been studying.
I don't know if I've got screen check.
Can you guys see this?
Yeah, there's something wrong there, Larry, for the following reasons.
It says in 1957 subject that would be Lee Oswald.
And was active in aerial reconnaissance of mainland China.
But he was going through recruit training in 1957.
I don't see... Exactly, that's my point.
Because this memo has been criticized and has been questioned as to his authenticity.
And my dad was saying, hey, wait a minute, where's the second page?
Where, you know, this is, you only see the first page.
And if you read this memo, you'll see that it cuts off at the bottom.
But the highlight there in yellow, where it says, subject, Oswald Subject was trained by this agency.
This is called the Rowley-McCone Memo.
And March the 3rd, 1964.
And this has been the subject of a lot of speculation and a lot of study in JFK circles.
And I thought that, you know, maybe we could, you know, comment on this one because this one You know, if it's authentic, this is a real smoking gun, you know, as far as Lee Oswald's connection to the CIA.
But I agree with what Jim is saying here about China, because we don't know anything about Lee Oswald being involved in any type of... We do know he was undergoing recruit training in 1957.
That's when he qualified with a .212, which is fairly reasonable shooting.
Then in 1958, he didn't even go to the rifle range.
Which is extraordinary, since there's a standing order that every Marine from the lowest private to the commandant of the Marine Corps must qualify with a rifle every year, telling me he had to be on special assignment that exempted him from the general order.
Then in 59, he barely qualified with a 191.
That was a gift, no doubt, from the pits, because he was even missing the target.
Now, something's wrong with this, Larry.
I don't want to lose the thread of discussion between Don and John, however, I think that's of great importance.
This document is interesting, but I think we may want to return to that conversation.
Sure, sure, sure, absolutely.
John, you may have a comment on this thing, because there's something very, very wrong with that paragraph.
I think that anytime you have a document in your hand, you You should assume that it's a forgery and examine it, but that should be the presumption until you can go in and verify every aspect, right?
You have to take the smallest detail and go in and verify whether or not that's true.
And if you find that, yes, it fits right, every way, shape and form.
But John Kennedy, I think, was pro-democracy because he was Jewish.
That's what it is.
And it's my observation that John Kennedy was murdered by the American aristocracy and that it was an anti-democratic act.
They're murdering him in order to promote the aristocracy that they, the military industrial complex.
I don't, I don't know whether, whether Don thinks it's Jewish or not.
And I don't know.
And I don't, to me, maybe.
John, who came up with the single bullet theory?
John, who invented the single bullet theory?
Who came up with it?
I don't know.
And I don't know if I too much care.
Hold on, Don.
Was it Homicide Detectives?
No.
Was it... Homesticks Experts?
Well, it's usually a tribute to Darwin Specter.
Yes, it's a tribute to Darwin Specter.
Larry's got a memo of who actually did come up with the single bullet theory.
Yeah, yeah.
Yeah, we have a chapter in our book about that.
In fact, it was four Jewish lawyers, believe it or not.
Yes, exactly.
In a room?
Eisenberg and Redlich.
In a room?
They had a room for eight hours and came up with the single bullet theory.
And I did it all the time.
They had to figure out how to account for all the wounds with only two shots.
Yeah.
But I don't think they did.
They didn't.
It seems to me that they didn't do any favors.
for the killers in coming up with the single bullet theory.
Anybody who wants to expose the nature of the Kennedy assassination, the single bullet theory is one of the prime tools, one of the prime weapons that I suspect all of us have wielded at one time or another, right, in order to drive a sword through the heart of those who would What's the word?
You think it was just a coincidence that four Jewish lawyers happened to come up with this?
And when the FBI said, wait a minute, wait a minute, this is ridiculous.
Of course it was bullshit, but it was a cover-up attempt.
They had to do something.
They couldn't admit what really happened.
Well, he already had it shot to the throat.
It was a wound of entry.
As Malcolm Perry reported three times to the Parkland Press Conference, reported widely on radio and television.
He had a shot to the right temple, blew out the back of his head, already reported widely on radio and television that day.
Both of those shots fired from the front or the right front.
I mean, they were impaled on massive publicity that they had to let simmer a while so they could reconstruct the whole thing in a propagandistic fashion and account for all the wounds with only two bullets.
No, and not only that, Jim, Dr. Robert Shaw in the conference that afternoon said, look, Connolly's got, you know, this bullet in his leg.
Right.
That's right.
You don't have to search for it.
We know right where it is.
It's in John Connolly!
And of course, he was missing more.
He had more metal in his right wrist that Shaw had removed and was missing from this bullet that was supposed to have been the magic one.
What rubbish.
John, I think we really ought to have you back for you and Don to do a more thorough discussion about the protocols and all this and Don's very determined views for which he has a great many arguments.
I think it would be really interesting to have you guys continue your discussion.
Well, I wouldn't mind.
I don't mind agreeing to disagree.
It's called being a colleague, right?
Of course, well, I mean, yeah.
I would say, look, Henry Ford did a pretty good job of this.
He did, he did!
He did.
That was a pretty smart guy.
I got to invent the automobile.
Yeah, he happened to think the protocols were legit.
He actually published a newspaper.
The Dearborn Independent, yeah.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Do we know that the version he had was the same version you have, Don?
Yeah, it's the same one that's been in circulation since roughly 1905 or so.
Do you know of any variations on it that were even earlier?
Are they coming with specific editions?
The first one was translated into Russian, the first version of the protocols, and if you were caught with that in Russia back in 1910 or whatever, you would be shot on sight.
And so there's that one.
Then there's one on the website.
You mean if you had a copy of the protocol?
If you had a copy, yeah.
And then there's a more, there's a, there's a protocol.
It's just basically the protocols in modern English.
It's basically the same thing, just written a little differently, you know, kind of like your different versions of the Bible.
There's stuff in there that's really totally shocking about the superiority of Jews to everyone else who only exists to serve the Jews.
I mean, it's stunning stuff.
Well, if it's a fake, it's the most accurate fake document of all time, huh?
Doesn't it just nail it in every way?
As a description of the activity of the group.
Yeah, the only problem is everything that's laid out in the protocols has actually happened.
That's what Gary's saying.
Yeah.
That's what Larry's... That's what Gary's saying.
ADL will tell you it's a forgery, except all of it's true.
It works like a son of a gun for being a, you know... A fabrication!
John, John, John, go ahead.
It tells you that liberty, equality, and fraternity is an evil idea.
It's an evil Jewish idea, and I don't happen to agree with that.
But if I were an aristocrat, it seems to me I need to do everything I can to poison people's minds.
Against the notions of liberty, equality, and fraternity, and against the notion of democratic revolution.
Well, John, I don't think you're going to get a lot of argument about that.
I mean, of course.
I mean, you know, the French Revolution was justifiable in every possible way, so far as I can determine.
And frankly, we may need to undergo a parallel revolution here in the United States, because we're very much appropriate approaching the same kind of Exaggerated distribution of wealth and power in this country that was prevalent in France at the time.
And what about the role of the mainstream media, Jim, in all this?
It's in the protocols.
Well, hang on.
Let me point something out.
Let's not go down that rabbit hole.
Okay, okay.
I think this is a useful lesson.
When George W. Bush was dodging the draft, His commanding officer wrote a letter in which he complained about George W. Bush dodging the draft.
Where is he?
And Dan Rather did a story about this letter that was written by this guy.
Now, they went to the secretary who typed the letter and they showed her the letter and she said that letter is a forgery.
However, and you probably haven't heard this, but if you've got your hands on it, it's there, that she says, oh yes, I remember writing that letter, I remember what it said, and it said all of those things, but the one that you're handing me is a forgery.
That's right, because Karen Hughes and Karl Rove figured out there was a bad fitness report and they had it retyped on a newer IBM Selectric so they could pull the rug out from under Dan Rather, who verified word for word the content of the fitness report with the commanding officer who dictated it and the secretary who typed it.
They inferred that since it was a fake document, the content was false, which of course was a blunder, because the content was exactly accurate when they cleverly retyped it.
And how they would have known that!
You know, they pointed that out almost immediately, which meant, of course, prior knowledge, they planted it very cleverly and stung Dan Rather.
And this is all well covered in a movie that's right now being circulated called Truth with Robert Redford.
Oh yeah?
Yeah, yeah.
Very, very, you know, very accurate.
And what you're talking about has to do with the superscript where T.H.
10th Okay.
At the time, those typewriters could not do superscripts.
Okay?
And that's how, you know, Dan Rather was brought down, you know, with this whole situation.
And later on, it was proven that you could do superscripts on these typewriters.
Let me just mention before we have to conclude, because I know Gary is aware we're over time.
There's a wonderful movie called The Post about the Washington Post and the decision to publish the Pentagon Papers that I highly recommend.
It's really, really, very, very good.
At a time when the Washington Post was a reputable newspaper, actually, and Catherine Graham made a heroic decision to go forward.
I encourage you all to check it out if you get a chance.
It's well worth watching.
All right.
Yeah, I'm not gonna ask Don for his final words.
We're gonna have to save it for another time.
So, it's been the new JFK Show, number 182.
The Federal Reserve was Jewish, is Jewish.
Thanks, John.
Thanks, Larry.
Thanks, Jim.
In Dallas, Texas, three shots were fired at President Kennedy's motorcade.
That's what we were told.
Most Americans never believed Lee Oswald was the lone gunman, for excellent reasons.
In fact, there were at least six shooters, who fired from eight to ten shots or more, who are identified here.
We have, finally, the solution to the greatest murder mystery in history, laid out for the world to see, proof after proof after proof.
Photos were faked.
The body was changed.
X-rays were altered.
The home movies were fixed.
15 experts contribute to a 529-page book with 1,037 photos and diagrams in black and white and color.
Hi, this is Gary King.
If you'd like JFK, who, how, and why, and would like to support the new JFK Show, then go to PatriotRadioBooks.com.
▲
Export Selection