Cover Stories Are Used To Control Explanations
Cover Stories Are Used To Control Explanations
Paul Craig Roberts
Years ago James Jesus Angleton left me with the
impression that when an intelligence agency, such as the CIA, pulls off an
assassination, bombing, or any event with which the agency does not wish to be
associated, the agency uses the media to control the explanation by quickly
putting into place a cover story that, along with several others, has been
prepared in advance. I suggested that the new story that “the Saudis did 9/11”
was put into play to take the place of the worn and battered first cover story. http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/07/20/is-the-saudi-911-story-part-of-the-deception-paul-craig-roberts/
When the Oswald cover story for JFK’s assassination
came under heavy suspicion http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/05/24/jfk-100-paul-craig-roberts/, other cover stories appeared in the media. One was
that the Mafia killed JFK, because he was having affairs with their molls.
The fact that it made no sense did not stop many from
believing it. It did not occur to people more gullible than thoughtful that a
gangster would simply get another woman and not take the risk of assassinating
the US president over a woman. The last thing the Mafia would want would be for
Attorney General Robert Kennedy to bring the law down on the Mafia like a ton
of bricks.
Another cover story was that Castro did it. This made
even less sense. JFK had nixed the Joint Chiefs/CIA plan to invade Cuba, and he
had refused air cover to the CIA’s Bay of Pigs invasion. JFK would certainly
not be on Castro’s hit list.
Another cover story was that Lyndon Johnson was behind
Kennedy’s assassination. As I wrote, there is no doubt that LBJ covered up the
Joint Chiefs/CIA/Secret Service plot against JFK, as any president would have
done, because the alternative was to destroy the American people’s confidence
in the US military and security agencies. The Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court also covered up the plot, as did the Warren Commission, the media, and
the Congress.
The “Johnson did it” story is the most preposterous of
all. The Joint Chiefs, CIA, Secret Service, Chief Justice, Congress, and Media
are not going to participate in the murder of a President and its coverup just
for the sake of the VP’s personal ambition. The idea that so many strong
institutions would permit a VP to murder a President for no reason other than
the personal ambition of the VP is beyond absurdity.
Speaking of cover stories, I wonder if that is what we
are witnessing in the leaked information to the New York Times about the
Manchester Bombing. The only point of the leak is to set the story in place.
The British complaints about the leaked information serve to disguise the
leak’s purpose.
Setting a story in place early crowds out other
explanations. Remember, the government claims to have had no warning of 9/11
but knew instantly who did it and set the story in place. The same for the
Paris events, the Nice event, the Boston Marathon bombing, and I think all the
others.
Authorities quickly come up with a story and names of
those responsible. The alleged perpetrators or patsies, take your choice, are
always dead and, thereby, unable to deny that they did it or say who put them
up to it. The only exception that comes to mind is the younger brother who has
been associated with the Boston Marathon bombing. Despite two police attempts
to shoot him to death, he inconveniently survived, but has never been seen or
heard from. As his orchestrated trial, his court appointed attorney confessed
for him, and the jury convicted on her confession.
Remember, Oswald was shot dead by Jack Ruby before
Oswald was questioned by police. There is no explanation for an armed private
citizen being inside the jail with Oswald and positioned to shoot him at close
range. Clearly, Oswald was not to be permitted to give his story. And no patsie
since has either.
No comments:
Post a Comment