A few minutes ago, I did a search on my computer for Castro, so I could write a little
report on why American Politicians really dislike Castro... the report was the 8 hour
speech Castro gave telling the entire conspiracy of the assassination of Pres. John F.
Kennedy.... I'm sure I'll find it again. But instead, all the search came up with was this
report on the North American Union that you "wrote", and the text of the
Unabomber's "manifesto"... we won't go there for the moment.
By now, I assume you know who I am, and, that in theory, I'm not necessarily against
the issues you guys look at, but at this point, I most certainly object to your methods.
I look at things like, here's an organization that supposedly incorporated in 1973, the
same year as the Tri-lateral Commission, and yet, your material says you were formed in
1921. I know that's true, and a bunch of other stuff, but the fact is, this "Building
A North Ameican Community" report is nothing but whitewash for the colonialization of
the Americas... and yeah, I've read the protocols... therefore the world. Good Hegellian
dialectic. You forgot about the part where God pulls the plug.
And I remembered that Jimmy wrote the Tri-Lateral Plan in 1958. Why all the
secrecy? What is it that you don't want America, and the world, to know? How many people
ar going to go bankrupt? How many will die? How many American dreams will you and your
freinds abort this time?
This colonialization thing... would you like to tell people what being a Rhodes Scholar
really means to your organization, or shall I?
Let see, Rhodes, Rhodesia (and look at what a mess the rights of kings has done there),
British Colonialization, the Civil War.... so you guys actually, really, stand for
empirical colonialization. And you've replaced "new World Order" with the word
Not like millions of other people haven't claimed it before. But, here I am, there you
are, and I'm saying no. I expect at some point someone will advise you that it's in your
best interest to read this yourself.
I know that's difficult for powerful people to hear, but if you need assistance dealing
with it, go talk to Jimmy... or Good Old Dad.
It's not like I don't respect people like you. But, sociopathy is catching, like a
disease. And it harms people. Real people. People you are lying to when you say you are
concerned for THEIR well being, security and lives. I just thought you should be forced to
hear that, because it apparently has slipped your mind.
You and I will meet one day. I look forward to the discussion. Somebody needs to talk
PS: Say hi to Tom Brokaw and Colin Powell for me.. and Hillary and Barack and Bill and
Paul Wolfowicz and Donny Rumsfeld and Wesley Clark and the rest of the gang and Chicago
See also: The Opportunity: America's Moment to Alter History's Course, By
Kennedy, Khrushchev and Castro on the
Brink of Nuclear War
By Michael Dobbs Posted - July 2, 2008
Senior Kennedy administration aides claimed incorrectly that U.S. warships had come
eyeball to eyeball with Soviet missile-carrying ships during the Cuban missile
crisis, a myth that has persisted for over four decades, according to evidence published
today by the National Security Archive.
A new book by Washington Post reporter Michael Dobbs
plots the positions of Soviet and American ships on October 24, 1962, when Secretary of
State Dean Rusk said that we were eyeball to eyeball, and the other fellow just
blinked. It shows that the missile-carrying ships were already headed back to the
Soviet Union at this point, and were at least 500 nautical miles from the closest American
This is the last of five postings looking at the new material in One Minute to Midnight: Kennedy, Khrushchev, and Castro on the
Brink of Nuclear War, which draws on the National Security Archive's long-standing
documentary work on the Cuban missile crisis. The book also tracks the
movement of Soviet submarines armed with nuclear torpedoes during the crisis in the
vicinity of the quarantine barrier.