Obama Addresses The Haters And Race Baiters In Stirring Dallas Tribute

Obama makes a point to all the haters yesterday at Dallas Tribute to slain officers.

"And I'm reminded of a passage in John's Gospel: 'Let us love not with words or speech but with actions, and in truth'.  .....In our society we choose to underinvest in decent schools, we allow poverty to fester so that entire neighborhoods offer no prospect for gainful employment, we refuse to fund drug treatment and mental health programs,.

And then we tell the police, 'you're the social worker, you're the parent, you're the teacher, you're the drug counselor. We tell them to keep those neighborhoods in check at all costs. We flood communities with so many guns that it's easier for a teenager to get his hands on a Glock than it is on a computer or a book. And, do so without causing any political blowback or inconvenience. Don't make a mistake that might disturb our own peace of mind. And then we feign surprise when periodically the tensions boil over.

We know those things to be true, we've known that for a long time. Police, you know it. Protesters, you know it.  You know how dangerous some of the communities these police officers serve are. And you pretend there is not context. These things we know to be true, And if we cannot even talk about these things honestly and openly - not just in the comfort of our own circles but with those who look different from us or bring a different perspective - then we will never break this dangerous cycle."

- President Barack Obama in his speech at the Dallas Memorial for five slain officers Tuesday

Sadly, most of Obama's speech and words - powerful as they were, encompassing as much veracity and integrity as they did - will be outright rejected by those more accustomed to speeches "at the third grade level" - as one commentator put in on Chris Hayes' 'All In' last night. This is sad, because at third grade level nuance escapes minds in favor of bombast and buffoonery. The clown and his antics prevail over the temperate, sober voices.  Truth is lost amidst the wreckage of bunkum, loose rhetoric and unsupported claims. The worst part is that those who most needed to process Obama's words and let them sink in likely tuned him out as "another black terrorist", or reduced  him to the hackneyed  cartoon epithet of "Obummer" or "Obozo". 

And so no wonder this nation is unable to halt its death spiral which begins with anarchy, lawlessness and chaos.  But in the case of rejection of Obama and his much needed words, we already know why this gained such a toehold in certain quarters.

Let us admit that as the first African-American to ever ascend to the highest office, Barack Obama has since day one faced legions of race haters and baiters. A lot that seems to populate this nation like Piranha do the Amazon River Basin.  Unable to tolerate a person of color as Chief Executive, these haters have been at his throat since his 2008  inauguration, unable to come to terms with their own racial hate. The latter betrayed by the too facile, too liberal employment  of disparaging terms like "monkeys" and "apes" - which give away their game.

In like manner the BLM or Black Lives Matter movement has also come under opprobrium even to the extent of being called "terrorists". Some deluded folks have even opined that the insane sniper Micah Johnson was a "terrorist" recruited by Black Lives Matter which is a totally irrational proposition apart from being unsupported. As one BLM advocate noted in the Saturday New York Times, "We had white people finally coming to see what we saw in violence visited upon us" - with the logical inference left unsaid 'So why in the hell would we use a fool like Micah Johnson to undermine our cause".

But as I pointed out, a cynical underground movement in contempt of Dallas Police Chief Brown's community policing efforts and intolerance for police violence,  would.  This is the whole basis for a false flag, a title originally earned with the operations set in motion by Operations Mongoose and Northwoods, which used the cover of phony planned attacks on U.S. interests to  then be blamed on Cuba to initiate a war. One of the documents with those plans I had published in an earlier post from five years ago.

Hence, it is not at all preposterous that craven and duplicitous interests could make use of a seeming opposite ally to carry out plans to besmirch and destroy a movement the superficial thinker might attach to that selfsame ally.

 I myself stand accused of using  epithets to attack Black Lives Matter, following an early altercation in which BLM protestors interrupted a Bernie Sanders' speech last year and snatched the microphone from him as he looked on dumbfounded. Instead of charging onto a stage and intimidating a 73-old man who was on their side, e.g.


 I challenged the movement and protesters to venture into the realm of risk and upend or screech at Trump rallies and those of other repukes - their real enemies if you will. This they did and as they did so, even to the extent of being punched out by one or more pro-Trump looneytunes e.g.in North Carolina, I found myself giving them a grudging respect

Obama, to his credit, did much more than I did and dared to negotiate the intersection between the millions who support police and the millions who support racial justice. Thus,  he called for action to stop the conflict between police and protesters and black and white, admitting previous approaches, including his own, were failing.  He added: “I understand how Americans are feeling. But, Dallas, I’m here to say we must reject such despair. I’m here to insist that we are not as divided as we seem.”

Maybe. But so long as division, distrust and hatred occupy too many minds of our fellow citizens we will remain divided, even if not as extreme as things were in 1968. In that year, racial animus reached a boiling point with riots and bloodshed after the slaying of Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Let us recall Obama's words from last night:

"I believe our righteous anger can be transformed into more justice and more peace."

But that can only happen if all sides cease to see themselves as the sole beacons of truth and moral rectitude.. In other words, we must be able to see the experiences of others through their eyes. This means rejecting the temptation to brand every black man shot and killed by police as a "violent criminal" including listing his purported arrest record to attempt to minimize the slaying. It also means ceasing to portray all cops as fascist, out of control monsters where the reactionary bullies are conflated with the decent upholders of order.

Probably the words of young Cameron Sterling, son of Baton Rouge victim Alton Sterling,  best embody what this nation ought to strive toward:

"It's not right to mix up bad police with the good. The police in Dallas, Texas, they didn't deserve that. They might have had kids to go home to and those kids need their parents. I truly just want everyone to protest the right way, in peace not in violence. Not in beating the police and not in the police beating the people. That makes no sense, that makes things worse. You have to make things better by making peace."

See also:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/john-feffer/68087/how-this-became-the-era-of-the-gunman

The Myth of the "Lone Gunman" Resurfaces in Dallas Shootings - But Don't Compare to November, 1963

Echoes from the triangulated sniper assassination of JFK on November 22, 1963, rebounded in many viewers' minds last night as Dallas sniper killings unfolded.

For a while, maybe 18 hours, the tragic scenes unfolding last night in downtown Dallas (not far from Dealey Plaza)   had the corporate media's heads exploding. As the violence played out, 5 Dallas police officers lost their lives and 7 more were wounded amidst staccato bursts of rifle fire from different locations - to judge by police, and onlookers' reactions recorded on assorted popular media. On one Facebook-posted  video I viewed on the nola.com website, bullet tracers could be seen fired from a high rise.  Dallas cops pointed up to it, several others ducked or sought cover near their vehicle. This morning another shooter could be seen firing from ground level. I suspect this ground level guy was Micah Johnson (soon to emerge as the media's lone gunman.) The typical ambush strategy: fire from multiple heights and locations to keep the targets confused.

 As the carnage played out, causing many of us to gasp, others were reminded of the similar carnage from November 22, 1963 - even as names of similar landmarks (e.g. Parkland Hospital) were referred to.

The mainstream media's heads were (temporarily) confounded because right before their eyes as the hours dragged on and more lives were lost, it was evident a terrible conspiracy to kill police had manifested. For the media that has so long denied that conspiracies were even possible - more in the realm of nut whacks and tin foils -  there was one happening in real time.  By the end of the terrible hours, three suspects were claimed to be in custody - one (Johnson)  killed after an "hours long" standoff with Dallas police. I repeat that again, FOUR suspects, not one,  i.e. no lone gunman to pin the evil act on. However, that was last night. By mid-morning one could see the narrative begin to change as more and more media credence was placed on Johnson's claim he acted alone.

So as is their wont, and acknowledging they'd have to embrace the  dreaded c-word at last,  the media began to use Johnson's own words to alter the narrative. This despite multiple sight lines from different altitudes made by trained law enforcement officers - and we're now to believe only one perp  acted all by his lonesome. So now the media expects us to buy that this one guy - on HIS say so -  simultaneously fired from different triangulated positions and shot 12 officers.

If you actually buy that garbage ...well... I have a choice plot of land on Barbados' east coast to sell you - for a buck - which may be all it's worth after the sea gobbles it up.

To reinforce the media's idiotic take,  the new line appearing on CNN  (at 12:50 p.m. local time) was 'Sources: Dallas Gunman was the lone shooter'  Well, maybe - if from the FB videos I watched last night the guy was operating 4 AR-15s at the same time from different positions. Hey, maybe it was possible for him to move at the speed of light - from a high rise to ground level etc. But see, that's at least as lame as the Warrenites (and 1963 media)  insisting Lee Oswald used an unworkable, ancient Italian carbine to make three world class shots in 5.6 secs and take out JFK.

 Of course, just as Lee Oswald in 1963,  this new "lone gunman" (military- trained Army reservist  Micah Johnson)  was killed, taken out by a bomb-laden robot. So alas,  he can never come to trial and like Lee Oswald - we can never learn the full story or whether Johnson had co-conspirators in at least the planning,  choice of sniper spots. (As the Dallas Mayor still appears to suspect.)  Look for accidents or other "clarifications" to emerge, i.e. 'Well we made a mistake there.....", to account for there now being only one suspect.

But long time CBS journalist Bob Schieffer, himself dismissive of conspiracy in the Kennedy case, was compelled to admit this morning in an appearance on CBS Early Show:

"This was not a random act by some deranged person. This was a carefully planned, military -style operation. This was a classic ambush where the ambushers put their shooters on the high ground, surrounded a certain area..."

Interestingly, Schieffer was suddenly cut off midway through his last sentence and the usual CBS Early show presentation was replaced by a live feed out of CBS New York.  A planned 'hit' by the network who feared Bob's words may elicit memories of that other ambush? Who knows?

Enough of Schieffer's interview made it out  (and I still have it on my DVR list) that even a dolt would grasp that he meant a planned and strategically coordinated act:  a conspiracy. Schieffer's words, indeed, might also have been used to describe the event that unfolded near the same area in Dallas over 52 years ago, and which former British Intelligence officer Col. John Hughes-Wilson also described as a classic, military-style  ambush. ('JFK - An American Coup  D'Etat')

Hughes-Wilson, whose exposition of how the JFK kill was done also has received the acknowledgement of Rolf, a former Swiss Spezialdienst. Rolf affirmed "Hughes -Wilson nailed it" in a recent email.   Hughes-Wilson - like Rolf- enumerated a total of TEN shots on Nov. 22, 1963 (pp. 188-89):

Shot 1: Struck sparks behind JFK's limo, observed by Royce Skelton and Austin Miller

Shot 2: Struck curb on the north side of Elm and a fragment struck bystander James Tague

Shot 3: Struck across a manhole cover and embedded in the grass, later DPD officers photographed removing it. It never was assayed in official documents and supports Carl Oglesby's argument the Dallas police were conscripted to remove evidence.

Shot 4: Frontal shot struck JFK in the throat, and he's visible clutching his throat. See e.g. below


Shot 5: Struck Kennedy in the upper back (in line with fifth thoracic vertebra) and came from a "relatively flat trajectory"  (see image in photo- right)

Shot 6: Misfire but struck limo - causing indentation in limo's windscreen  (see image below as well as image of where Tague shot struck)

(N.B. These images from other sources, not Col. Hughes-Wilson's book)

Shot 7: Bullet punched hole through Stemmons Freeway sign.("The bullet had punched through from the direction of the grassy knoll and blown the rim backwards")

Shots 8, 9: Two bullets struck Gov. John Connally: - Shot from the back that smashed into his chest and shot that shattered his wrist.

Shot 10: The fatal head shot from direction of grassy knoll.

Col. John Hughes-Wilson, a trained intel operative like Rolf, never bought the "legend" that one magic bullet created all the 7 wounds in JFK and Connally and emerged pristine.  Both, again, could easily spot the hands of the propaganda teams.

Thus, we beheld a planned, military -style ambush that occurred in each case, EXCEPT that in the JFK events all the conspirators got away, in the Dallas sniper shootings last night they didn't. Those who seek to make comparisons to the events of 1963 have to take that into account, and some commentators  - talking call in heads on MSNBC last night did not. One guy interviewed by Brian Williams even went so far as to praise the actions of the 1963 Dallas PD, but such praise is misplaced - as Col. Hughes-Wilson has noted (pp. 324-25), as well as former Justice Dept. prosecutor Walt Brown ('Treachery in Dallas', 'Blue Death', e.g. p. 124:

"Dealey Plaza was the kill zone all along, and elements of the Dallas police, hardly friendly to Kennedy, had the weapons, skill and ability to blend into the scenery and come and go casually....this section of the book will show how the Dallas police controlled the motorcade route, the manpower allotments, the interrogation of the one serious suspect, and the safety of the prisoner..."

Meanwhile, Brown recites a litany of either ineptitude - or possible planned indifference -  to the whole Nov. 22, 1963 crime scene (in contrast to the Dallas sniper shootings where a five block area was made an "active crime scene".  As Brown notes (p. 125):

"No crime scene involved in the assassination was ever truly sealed. They (Dallas police) rushed to the grassy knoll, stayed only long enough to take a cursory look and sniff gunpowder, to which they attached no significance. ...There was a pervasive pattern of not taking names and addresses as if they did not want to know. Certain witnesses were totally ignored. No impedimenta were placed in the way of potential fleeing assassins."

The last is key to grasping the difference of why the conspirators in the Dallas sniper shootings were apprehended but not the snipers-mechanics in the JFK assassination. In a nutshell, the latter snipers were allowed to go undoubtedly as Col. Hughes -Wilson notes, as part of a national security pact with the elements of the CIA, NSA that orchestrated the strategy for Kennedy. As Hughes-Wilson notes the background details from a source (p. 142): "In the first week of November, three Corsican gunmen slipped across the Mexican border using Italian passports. They were ensconced in a CIA house by Dallas policeman Roscoe White, acting for the CIA".

The point is, if elements of the then Dallas PD were charged with hiding the mechanics, they wouldn't also set up blockades after the events to apprehend them. This distrust of the then Dallas cops was also a theme that ran through Carl Oglesby's book, ('JFK - The Facts and the Theories', p. 94) Oglesby points out that there was NO chain of credible evidence connecting Oswald to the casings or the rifle found  at the Book Depository. Neither proves Oswald fired from there- or fired at all, a point with which Col. Hughes-Wilson concurs. . Further, Oglesby himself suspects they were planted compliments of the Dallas PD. - a point that conforms with Walt Brown's take in his section 'Blue Death'.

Col. Hughes-Wilson also concurs with Brown and author James Douglass ('JFK and the Unspeakable') that the original plan was to knock off Oswald at the Texas Theater so there was no chance of his ever getting his say at a public trial  Douglass (p. 292) makes it known that the Dallas cops approached Oswald (in his seat) "almost as if they were provoking the suspected police killer to break away from his seat ..which would have given Tippet's enraged fellow officers an excuse to kill him".

But Oswald did no such thing. Nor did he attempt to fire any shots.  Lee clearly and obviously knew by now he'd been set up as the patsy and the last thing he wanted to do was make these Dallas cops his judge, jury and executioners. No, he wanted to have his trial and his say, and how and why he'd been set up. So, rather than mindlessly react he expressly said:  "I am not resisting arrest! Police brutality!"  He never said  "It's all over now" - those words were put into his mouth by the WC's cavalcade of faux witness puppets and liars.

Col. Hughes-Wilson cites his own source (p. 176) who overheard two Dallas cops talking about how Oswald was to have been killed before he ever arrived at the station. One,  in a snarling voice,  said to the other (ibid.) "You were supposed to kill Lee....you stupid son of a bitch, then you go and kill a cop". Referring to the shooting of officer J.D. Tippet.

So there were snafus along the way, even the best planned conspiracies can go awry, but in the JFK case the architects ensured there was always a back up plan. In this case, to recruit former Chicago mobster Jack Rubinstein, aka Ruby, to snuff Oswald. Mark North, using actual,  released FBI files, documents many of Ruby’s Mob connections in his book, Act of Treason- including his reported “gangster connections in Dallas”, especially to Joseph Civello, the Mafia boss in Dallas. The same files disclose that Ruby, on October 26, 1963, “placed a 12 minute person to person call to Irwin S. Weiner at Weiner’s Chicago home”.

It is further noted that Weiner was:

 “a prominent Chicago Mafia associate” and “instrumental in coordinating the flow of cash between the Teamsters and Las Vegas casinos." (North, op. cit., pp. 333-34).  

All of this Col. Hughes-Wilson agrees with. North (like Hughes-Wilson)  conjectures that  the phone call concerned Ruby 's outstanding  debt to Uncle Sam - owing more than $40,000 in back excise taxes to the federal government, plus $20,000 in other back taxes. A phone call could then have assured Ruby his tax problems would “disappear” if he performed one more job: offing Oswald. He did, but as Hughes-Wilson has observed, the Warrenite puppets and propagandizers are still trying after 52 years to "rubbish" it.

Let us agree then that while last night's horrific events and the slaying of five Dallas policemen might have triggered echoes from the past, there is not a one to one correspondence to Nov. 22, 1963.  Many of the Dallas cops at that time, in particular, were not working overtime to nab the shooters- but actually enabling their escape in conformance to orders from higher ups and especially the national security state.  Their sole objective was concerned with ensuring Kennedy never left Big D alive.

By contrast, the Dallas cops last night had sworn to protect the lives of the protestors downtown and they were. The sniveling cowards who opened fire on them waited until the main crowd of protestors had dispersed. Two traumatic events taking place in Dallas, but worlds apart in outcomes and dynamics.

For this reason, talking heads in the 24/7 media especially need to take care when they try to formulate comparisons to past events, namely the Kennedy assassination in the same city.

In the meantime, in classic MSM -style,  look for the story to continue to mutate away from the "military -style ambush" of multiple shooters described by Bob Schieffer, and one Dallas law officer, to the "acts of a crazed lone gunman, angry at white police officers".  Our useless corporate media accepts at face value the words of Micah Johnson - doing all that rapid shooting himself from obviously different locations-  but 52 years ago refused to believe Lee Oswald when he insisted "I am just a patsy!". Go figure!

We've been played a similar tune before, but by now I hope we've wised up. So far the "lone gunman" narrative is only on CNN but look for it to migrate. (Ooops! I see it already made it to the headlines on USA Today!)

-----
End Note:

Might I eventually accept Johnson as the lone gunman? Sure, once  I see a map of the "active crime scene"  showing all the presumed locations with line of sight distances indicated and the targets hit from those positions. If it all adds up satisfactorily, then yeah, I'll bite. Maybe!