Whispers and Imuendos

People with their feet firmly planted on the ground believe firmly in the Conspiracy theory when it comes to the assenations of John and Robert Kennedy. These people don't have a screw loose or something. There is a book out called "Legacy of Secrecy" that is one of the more recent books on the Assasenation of John Kennedy. Two people, San Giancana and Johnny Roselli were killed either before or during their Senate testimony of the Frank Church committee. Roselli testified lin late April of 1976 and was scheduled to testify again in August of 1976. But he disappeared in late July and in early August his dismembered body was found decomposing in a drum cannister in Miami. According to one source, Roselli either fired the fatal shot that killed Kennedy or was with two others who did. This was done from a storm drain on Elm Street in Dallas. Now it's mentioned that the Kennedy adminestration was planning a new planned overthrow of the Castro government in Cuba in December of 1963 but that the Mafia still didn't want this coup to occur, for whatever reason, perhaps because it would give the president new political power to go after them. Also they had to kill Robert Kennedy because there are measures that needed to be taken to clear away all the secrets and shine in a little sunlight on the Mafia's dark, murky past and present- - that only a President could order. So they say that Sirhan Sirhan's family was scared to death of the mafia. Johnson, according to the author, was so afraid of what the Mafia might do that he ordered the whole Warren commision report as a vehical for coverint up the truth. There is also false evidence that the Mafia planted against Castro to make him look guilty of things he wasn't. The Book appears to imply that the Mafia was a lot more powerful forty or fifty years ago than it is today. Certain things are beyond doubt. Such as the fact that the first place the Dallas Police department ran after the shots were fired was to the grassn noll, and a lot of ordenary people saw and heard things in that direction too. But there are also a lot of eye witness reports about things that happened on 9 - 11 at Ground Zero, that the government would not like to become general knowledge. Two names worth noting among you Federation fans are Jimmy Hoffa and Johnny Roselli. Roselli has been a very fruitful source for information, Federation people tell me, with a lot of stories to relate. As to Hoffa, we have heard from his guardian angels that it was Hoffa's wish to join the Federation. This whole guardian angel thing is interesting in that at least three times in my life I have experianced the presence of guardian angels of dead people, without any contact with the dead person himself. These three cases are Elvis Presley, Ricky Nelson, and Marlon Brando. Being "flush" with guardian angels causes one to shall we say, opperate at a higher energy level than normal, saying, thinking, and doing things that one had formerly either lacked the initiative to do, or was prevented from doing before.

Our second of four topics covers that phone call I got from my Mom late yesterday afternoon. Unlike the Beatles with the "Let It Be" album, I'm going to completely redo this report today because yesterday I was perhaps too upset going into a hysterical rant about things. It seems that our esteemed Governor wants to gut programs such as child care and walfare and other services to the poor including whack two hundred dollars off monthly S S I checks, as well as completely eliminate Dental care from medi-cal. Governor Swartzenegger has repeatedly stated that "raising taxes is not an option". Rather than impeach the governor, I'd like to haul off and impeach the entire voting public of California. It's ironic that it takes a slim majority vote to as the proponets say "deny a fundamental right to the citizens" and alter the state constitution, and yet to raise taxes on ANYTHING it takes a two thirds majority vote, which as you might guess, is almost impossible to achieve. There is something systemically wrong with California State government and there has been since Proposition 13 was passed in 1978. There are now rising up some prudent people who want to overturn proposition 13. The sooner the better in my oppinion, and I don't care how they do it, I'd just like to see it done. My only hope is that the cuts I've heard about are so draconian and will throw countless people, and perhaps this writer, into the streets- - that somehow saner minds will pervail. Let's hope so.

Nobody likes an Uncle Tom. You've heard that one, but you know a lot of those old generalizations turn out to be true. There are a couple of "Tom's" I'd like to discuss here. One is Clarence Thomas. Here is a man who in my oppinion is not intellectually qualified to sit on the Supreme Court. He lacks "judicial temperment" and a lot of other essential qualities, too. He almost never asks questions but is content to let others do the talking, and one suspects, the thinking for him, too, like Justice Scallia. Personally I can't get over how hauty Thomas acted at his senate confirmation. In the first place he's a hypocrite benefiting from affirmative action programs when he was younger, and yet turning against them now. One of my pet peves about people in general is those who think they were dropped off by the Mother Space Ship yesterday and somehow have no past. The fact is that everybody who passes judgement on You has their own Past and they "Got Here" somehow. They've lived a life and made their mistakes. But these hypocrits seem to want to step outside their own body and now somehow claim that they are perfect and they have no "past" of their own. The other Tom I'd like to discuss is Tom Bradley. This is the quintessential Uncle Tom. One would wonder how LA could have a Black mayer and at virtually for the same period, have one of the most racist Police Chiefs, at least within my memory, that Los Angeles has ever had. Both Chief Daryl Gates and Tom Bradley left office within months of each other. Tom Bradley was a protogee of Police Chief Parker, whose racism is apparently legondary. Bradley must have done some world class Uncle-Tom-ming to get on Chief Parker's good side. You know that during the tenure of Chief Dayl Gates, there was one racial incident after another and there was all sorts of debates about choke holds and "Blacks don't have veins like Normal People" and all that, and stuff about Latinos also. All of this stuff was going on during the Bradley adminestration and he wasn't inclined to want to do a thing about it. I don't know about you but to me, a person who hates his own race has mental problems or something. Of course the Apostle Paul was an "Uncle Tom" in his day. The only worldly factoid that he was really Prowd of- - -was the fact that he was a "Natural born Roman citizen" whereas others had to obtain their citizenship with a great deal of money. You certainly see him only passing contempt and scorn on his own race. People who allow themselves to be used in Pawns in someone else's game- - are dangerous, just like the Dylan song says. They love to swell with pride but it isn't pride in their own merits but rather a false pride that's foisted on them by their Overlords to Manipulate them, like the morally spineless puppets they are.

There are four fundamental ways in which I agree with Mormonism over "My Own Faith" so to speak. The Federation has as you know, always had a soft spot for Mormons. None of these polygamy cult stories gets air play up there. The first area of agreement is something I saw in a film while visiting Salt Lake City, that after you die, the memory of your heavenly pre existance will be restored to you. One reason why most fundamentalist protestents cringe at this doctrine is that they want you worshipping the DATE that you decided to "accept Jesus". They would dearly love to see you only as a blank, and hence, programmable slate. But the Bible supports me and the Mormons in that it state "When you die, your soul returns to God, who gave it". The same scripture also says "As a dog dies so dies a man". To me that would mean that if you have to accept Christ to die, than so does your dog" (!) Of course when you die you are no longer in the realm, so far as we know in the Time-Space continuoum. It logically can be inferred that since Time after all is "temperal" that when you escape it, you revert back to whatever state you were in when you entered "Through the Wall". (Selah) My second area of agreement with the Mormons is in their doctrine of who Jesus was and who he was not. Jesus was not the second person of the Trinity because the Trinity Doctrine is tracable to a guy named Athenasius of Egypt who lived at the beginning of the Fourth Century AD. Before this the doctrine of the trinity was unknown and no previous theologian even suggested it. The third fundamental area of agreement is in baptismal regeneration. This is in reference to the often repeated scripture that "Whoever believes in Jesus and is baptized in water, the same shall we saved". Jesus spoke of one being "born of water and of the spirit" to emphasize baptismal regeneration. This seems like a slam dunk that everybody could agree with and nobody could dispute. But the Neo-Protestents don't like it. Because I think their argument is that baptisum puts the focus on the act- - rather than you "in your heart" if you will "submitting to the pastor". Neo-protestents are very pastoral-centric, as you know, and anything which takes attention off of them, even stained glass windows- - is a "No no" to their way of thinking. The fourth area of agreement is in the possability of baptism for the dead. The apostle Paul at one argues that baptisum for the dead is at least possible. Those who argue strenuously against it are basically saying "after death there is nothing so obviously the person can't be baptized". These Neo-Protestents when you analyze their theology believe that basically that Death IS the end. They see death as Nirvana and like the Moslems believe that a sudden, violent death is the most glorius and "honorable" way to go out. ("Die" for you people in Rio Linda) These people don't believe in soul sleep. They don't see the dead as "awaiting judgement" as the Book of Revelation clearly states. These people seem to want heaven to be an exclusive club. They say "Don't bring up the story of what if the missionary's jeep ran out of gas on the way to the village". They say "It's in God's hands" when really they would just rather not have certain people saved. The idea also of loving or caring what happens to an unsaved loved one is something they don't want to think about, being as self centered as they are. (Selah)