Tuesday, April 9, 2013

COP OUT on Political Assassinations

COP OUT – Texas DA Quits Prosecution of ABT in Fear

Now Who Isn’t Afraid To Go After President’s Killers?
By William E. Kelly, Jr.

The federal prosecutor who quit the racketeering case against the Aryan Brotherhood in Texas reflects the failures of all those in positions of authority who chose not to enforce the constitution and pursue those who kill policeman, prosecutors and presidents out of fear for their own careers and personal safety.  

According to news reports from Texas, “Two days after a Kaufman County District Attorney and his wife were gunned down in their home, a federal prosecutor withdrew from a racketeering case against the white supremacist group, reportedly citing security fears.” 1).

The Ayran Brotherhood Texas (ABT) unlike most criminals, don’t abide by the rules laid down by the organized crime syndicate’s Commission that made killing cops against the rules – the rules maintained among the criminal underground, mainly because killing a cop brings down more and unnecessary heat on all criminals and increases the determination of some law enforcement authorities to jail them all. 2).

Such political assassinations does achieve the goal all terrorists aspire of intimidating those legally responsible for upholding the law, instilling a fear of retaliation – ala the Gregory Peck film “Cape Fear,” in which a convict released from prison gets revenge against the family of the lawyer who put him behind bars.

In this case the federal district attorney placed his own personal safety and security above that of the Constitution he had sworn to uphold, which is understandable to some, and according to the Constitution, he is duly replaced by someone who is not deterred by threats to his personal safety or job security, or accepts those threats as part of the job.

For the same reasons, in the wake of the assassination of President Kennedy, those in a position of authority chose not to challenge the Warren Commission’s report’s false conclusion that the president was the victim of a deranged lone assassin, and follow the evidence that indicates the accused assassin was set up as a patsy and the President was murdered by a conspiracy of his enemies.

Why is the government so reluctant to do what it does in almost every other case of a suspicious death and conduct a grand jury inquriy? Why?

Their motives may be the same as the DA in Texas who resigned in fear of criminal retaliation, or they may just want to maintain job security and personal and family safety, especially from criminals who are powerful enough to kill a Dallas Policeman and the President of the United States and got away with it.

But we do know how they did it. They’ve managed to keep the case of the murdered president out of court by keeping the evidence and witnesses from a grand jury and by keeping the pubic debate going vigorously, for as long as the debate over the single-bullet theory, the Zapruder film’s authenticity and other such details continue, the Constitutional directive is conveniently ignored, the real killers go unpursued and there is no justice.

As E. Martin Schotz so eloquently puts it, “All of this brings us to the real cover-up over all these years, which was not ‘Oswald’ per se but rather ‘the debate over Oswald.’ In this process we see…the principles of intelligence agency assassination and cover-up as outlined by Isaac Don Levine, an associate of Allen Dulles, in his analysis of the assassination of Leon Trotsky by the Soviet Union’s NKVD. As Levine revealed, the classic manner by which an intelligence agency attempts to cover itself is by the use of confusion and mystery. The public is allowed to think anything it wants, but is not allowed to know, because the case is shrouded in supposed uncertainty and confusion. This was and is the big lie, that virtually no one is sure who really killed President Kennedy or why.”

“Of course over the years” Schotz continues, “the terms of the ‘debate’ have been shifted as the public has learned more and more about the case. Thus initially the phony debate was organized around the question of whether the Warren Report was accurate or not. In other words, the public was supposed to debate whether there was or wasn’t a conspiracy. As this position was gradually eroded and it became evident that more and more of the public did not believe in the lone assassin theory, another aspect of the debate was developed. The first fallback position of the government was to acknowledge that perhaps or more than likely there was a conspiracy, but if there was, the chief suspects were Fidel Castro, the KGB, or the Mafia. And while these theories were pushed, it was argued that the Warren Commission, acting in haste, had perhaps erred in missing an assassin here or there. But all this was framed as honest error.”

Shotz wrote, “In order to bolster the government’s credibility, the government always needed some writers who would argue that the Warren Report in fact had been true, that Oswald was the lone assassin after all. Thus the ‘debate’ was broadened and complicated, but the honor of the members of the Warren Commission was never conceded by the government. It is important to understand that for the purposes of the government it was not necessary that anyone actually be convinced that these defenders of the Warren Report were correct. It was only necessary that people believe that their writings were debatable, i.e., that there was some substance to their arguments that Oswald was the lone assassin. If that point could be debated, then the government was safe, because the criminal conspiracy of the government of the United States to shield the assassins after the fact was obscured.”

Thank you for setting us straight on that point Martin.

And so the debate continues and there is no Justice for JFK, at least there is none in the Department of Justice of the government of the United States.

The same fear exhibited by the resignation of the Texas DA is personified by the Justice Department officials who refuse to abide by the Constitution, follow the evidence where ever it leads and prosecute those suspected of having committed crimes related to the assassination of President Kennedy.

“As a general policy,” former Justice Department official Ben Civiletti testified before the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) in its last session, “the Department of Justice seldom turns down at least exploring, or reviewing a petition or reasonable request,…(and)…to some extent it becomes a matter of public will…but also a matter of judgment that falls within the duties of any particular department or agency of government…as to how far questions…can be explored to a useful or fruitful purpose.”

When John T. Orr, Jr.  Chief of the Anti-Trust Division’s Atlanta Office, received the Distinguish Service Award from the Attorney General he presented a paper that called attention to the fact that the bullet fragments from the floor of President Kennedy’s limo had not been tested for DNA, and he vigorously pushed for it and got it! (That deserves an exclamation point)

According to an official DOJ memo, “We met with Mr. Orr, while he was in Washington to receive a Distinguished Service Award from the Attorney General, and we have since reviewed the report which he prepared. It is our opinion that Mr. Orr’s observations justify the performance of certain modest preliminary investigative measures to test the foundation of his assassination conspiracy theory.”

“Jurisdiction. Federal criminal statutes covering the assassination of the President and assaults against federal officials generally were enacted after 1963. Accordingly, the criminal statutes of Texas represent the best, and probably only viable, mechanism for prosecution of any living person determined to have been involved in the assassination of President Kennedy. Despite the lack of apparent federal prosecutorial jurisdiction over the November 1963 assassination of President Kennedy, Congress and the Executive Branch have historically recognized Department of Justice investigative jurisdiction over the matter, concurrent with Texas investigative jurisdiction. The Federal Bureau of Investigation has been deemed the appropriate federal investigative agency for this matter, partly in recognition of the potential appearance of a conflict of interest which the Secret Service, as the protective force at the time of the assassination, would confront.”

“...It is our view that the Department has retained investigative jurisdiction over the assassination, though such investigation is restricted to activities which are not based upon the expectation of an eventual federal prosecution. Thus, the examination of evidence in federal possession is seemingly appropriate, while obtaining evidence by grand jury subpoena would likely be inappropriate. This position was adopted by the Division and endorsed b the Office of the Deputy Attorney General when we declined to seek a court order for exhumation of former Governor Connally’s body following allegations that bullet fragments remaining in his body from the incident would reveal, by weight or composition, the existence of additional bullets.” 

So the Department of Justice “retains investigative jurisdiction over the assassination, but restricts activities which are not based upon the expectation of an eventual prosecution,” and that’s even if they develop evidence of conspiracy or crimes related to the assassination.

And more than anything else, they think a grand jury, the one legal avenue the Constitution lays out to accept evidence in a murder "would be inappropriate."
1) NEW YORK DAILY NEWS  THURSDAY, APRIL 4, 2013  A federal prosecutor in Texas has quit a major case against the Aryan Brotherhood allegedly over fear for his life after the targeted slayings of two other prosecutors, the latest of which occurred on Saturday. [ http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/texas-prosecutor-quits-case-aryan-brotherhood-citing-security-article-1.1307426   PHILIP CAULFIELD 

2) See: 1929 Atlantic City Mob Convention.
3) Civilitti, Benjamin. HSCA Testimony

4) Schotz.  History Will Not Absolve  Orwellian Control, Public Denial,
and the Murder   of President Kennedy   by
E. Martin Schotz 

5) Orr Test Request of WCE-567

1 comment:

Patrick Henry said...

Yeah, you sure talk tough for a frigging little Blogger Boy. Why don't you get off your ass and go after them then? Talk is easy and that is all you do. Waaaah! Waaah! Waaaaah! And cry like a baby too. Bwaaaah! Bwaaaaah! Bwaaaah! What a pussy!