Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Octafish

(55,745 posts)
60. Right. Lots of people on DU mock 'Conspiracy Theories.' I'm not one of them.
Tue Aug 19, 2014, 03:31 PM
Aug 2014

Here's a good example why:

Nixon approved hiring a Secret Service man who said he'd 'kill on command' to guard Ted Kennedy. You can hear Nixon and Haldeman discuss it, about 40 minutes into the HBO documentary "Nixon by Nixon." While I had read the part of the transcript available years ago, and wrote about it on DU, almost no one I know has heard anything about it.



Ted Kennedy survived Richard Nixon's Plots

By Don Fulsom

In September 1972, Nixon’s continued political fear, personal loathing, and jealously of Kennedy led him to plant a spy in Kennedy’s Secret Service detail.

The mole Nixon selected for the Kennedy camp was already being groomed. He was a former agent from his Nixon’s vice presidential detail, Robert Newbrand—a man so loyal he once pledged he would do anything—even kill—for Nixon.

The President was most interested in learning about the Sen. Kennedy’s sex life. He wanted, more than anything, stated Haldeman in The Ends of Power, to “catch (Kennedy) in the sack with one of his babes.”

In a recently transcribed tape of a September 8, 1972 talk among the President and aides Bob Haldeman and Alexander Butterfield, Nixon asks whether Secret Service chief James Rowley would appoint Newbrand to head Kennedy’s detail:

Haldeman: He's to assign Newbrand.

President Nixon: Does he understand that he's to do that?

Butterfield: He's effectively already done it. And we have a full force assigned, 40 men.

Haldeman: I told them to put a big detail on him (unclear).

President Nixon: A big detail is correct. One that can cover him around the clock, every place he goes. (Laughter obscures mixed voices.)

President Nixon: Right. No, that's really true. He has got to have the same coverage that we give the others, because we're concerned about security and we will not assume the responsibility unless we're with him all the time.

Haldeman: And Amanda Burden (one of Kennedy’s alleged girlfriends) can't be trusted. (Unclear.) You never know what she might do. (Unclear.)

Haldeman then assures the President that Newbrand “will do anything that I tell him to … He really will. And he has come to me twice and absolutely, sincerely said, "With what you've done for me and what the President's done for me, I just want you to know, if you want someone killed, if you want anything else done, any way, any direction …"

President Nixon: The thing that I (unclear) is this: We just might get lucky and catch this son-of-a-bitch and ruin him for '76.

Haldeman: That's right.

President Nixon: He doesn't know what he's really getting into. We're going to cover him, and we are not going to take "no" for an answer. He can't say "no." The Kennedys are arrogant as hell with these Secret Service. He says, "Fine," and (Newbrand) should pick the detail, too.


Toward the end of this conversation, Nixon exclaims that Newbrand’s spying “(is) going to be fun,” and Haldeman responds: “Newbrand will just love it.”

Nixon also had a surveillance tip for Haldeman for his spy-to-be: “I want you to tell Newbrand if you will that (unclear) because he's a Catholic, sort of play it, he was for Jack Kennedy all the time. Play up to Kennedy, that "I'm a great admirer of Jack Kennedy." He's a member of the Holy Name Society. He wears a St. Christopher (unclear).” Haldeman laughs heartily at the President’s curious advice.

Despite the enthusiasm of Nixon and Haldeman, Newbrand apparently never produced anything of great value. When this particular round of Nixon’s spying on Kennedy was uncovered in 1997, The Washington Post quoted Butterfield as saying periodic reports on Kennedy's activities were delivered to Haldeman, but that Butterfield did not think any potentially damaging information was ever dug up.

SOURCE:

http://surftofind.com/tedkennedy



Why does that matter? The Warren Commission, and the nation's mass media, never heard about the CIA-Mafia plots to kill Castro until the Church Committee in 1975. You'd think that would be a matter of concern to all Americans, especially considering how then-vice president Nixon was head of the "White House Action Team" that contacted the Mafia for murder.

This is the sort of information citizens of a democracy shouldn't have to search the Internet to learn. It should be taught in school, or at the least, discussed in the nation's mass media. I certainly think it's unfair for people -- especially those who consider themselves Democrats or democrats -- to label those interested in such subjects "Conspiracy Theorists."

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

"...Ukrainian military personnel do have the required skills." Adsos Letter Aug 2014 #1
Or ex-Soviet military. HooptieWagon Aug 2014 #30
No doubt in my mind, and for the very reasons you outlined. n/t Adsos Letter Aug 2014 #37
Didn't you hear the US did it because they were trying to kill Putin davidpdx Aug 2014 #2
I didn't hear that. I did hear the fact that his plane did fly over that area on the way to, or from sabrina 1 Aug 2014 #3
Thank you. Well said. elias49 Aug 2014 #32
OFFS... His flight path was not actually over Ukraine at all. Adrahil Aug 2014 #44
Yup... SidDithers Aug 2014 #4
Oh, I know exactly who you are talking about davidpdx Aug 2014 #6
As opposed to those people who believe what they're told by corporate media, right? Octafish Aug 2014 #11
Truth hurt? davidpdx Aug 2014 #12
Well, we know who did it... zappaman Aug 2014 #13
The BFEE is a handle for War Inc. Octafish Aug 2014 #16
Not me. Octafish Aug 2014 #14
You might go back to post #11 and reread what you wrote in your response to me davidpdx Aug 2014 #15
No. Here's what I'm talking about... Octafish Aug 2014 #17
Yeah. zappaman Aug 2014 #20
Ok, so RT isn't 'corporate media'. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Aug 2014 #29
Excellent point. Octafish Aug 2014 #31
Reporters are not "corporate media." joshcryer Aug 2014 #38
You're writing to one. Octafish Aug 2014 #49
Ah, I see.... Adrahil Aug 2014 #45
No, that's not what I wrote. Octafish Aug 2014 #50
Thanks for the suto-correct catch... now then, what DID you mean? Adrahil Aug 2014 #52
I object to people who malign those interested in learning and sharing the truth. Octafish Aug 2014 #55
That's great, but.... Adrahil Aug 2014 #56
Right. Lots of people on DU mock 'Conspiracy Theories.' I'm not one of them. Octafish Aug 2014 #60
You mean those who believe anything our Corporate Media tells them? sabrina 1 Aug 2014 #34
Much better to just believe whatever Uncle Pootie would like you to believe, eh? NT Adrahil Aug 2014 #53
Didn't you mean to say 'Uncle Saddam'? sabrina 1 Aug 2014 #54
Ah yes... shift and dodge. Adrahil Aug 2014 #57
Another recycled right wing talking point against what they perceive as 'The dreaded Left'. sabrina 1 Aug 2014 #61
I'm not even CLOSE to right wing. Heck, half my extended family won't talk to me.... Adrahil Aug 2014 #63
That was not a "crash". Codeine Aug 2014 #5
on behalf of a Malaysian, non-native English speaker reorg Aug 2014 #7
Right, what's so hard about writing.. "The Mystery of the Malaysian Airlines Shot Down over Cha Aug 2014 #8
If you get a chance to read the article, you'll see there's no attempt to sanitize Karmadillo Aug 2014 #9
In the middle of a freaking war zone? randome Aug 2014 #10
wait, what you call "evidence" reorg Aug 2014 #18
Agree. All we have to go on so far from the war zone is what we see and hear. randome Aug 2014 #22
Well, thank you for agreeing that facts matter reorg Aug 2014 #23
Huh? There are eyewitness accounts. joshcryer Aug 2014 #40
given your astute monitoring of social media accounts reorg Aug 2014 #41
Ad hom. joshcryer Aug 2014 #42
You'd think Occam's razor would have cut them to ribbons by now. nt Nuclear Unicorn Aug 2014 #46
Reporters did that investigation. joshcryer Aug 2014 #39
All of it? Even the data released by the Russians and ignored by the corpse media? And if Karmadillo Aug 2014 #47
Funny how it went out of the news so quickly when some of the lies that were being told were sabrina 1 Aug 2014 #35
Vanishing point … reorg Aug 2014 #19
Yup. This ^^^. elias49 Aug 2014 #33
So...The piece is full of speculation, opinion, and unsourced "facts" Blue_Tires Aug 2014 #21
which speculative, premature conclusion reorg Aug 2014 #25
uh..the one near the bottom under "opinion"? Blue_Tires Aug 2014 #27
He lists three reasons why it should not prematurely ruled out reorg Aug 2014 #28
And I "may" be able to flap my arms and fly to the moon Blue_Tires Aug 2014 #48
sorry, I was reading this article at the same time reorg Aug 2014 #51
Oh, right...another sole unnamed "source" with no corroboration Blue_Tires Aug 2014 #62
"Shoot-down," not "crash." WinkyDink Aug 2014 #24
search "airlines crash"+"mh17" reorg Aug 2014 #26
Disagrees that it was a shoot-down? Thinks "crash" is a synonym? WinkyDink Aug 2014 #58
sigh, disagrees with your labelling reorg Aug 2014 #59
CNN BREAKING NEWS Capt. Obvious Aug 2014 #36
Message auto-removed Name removed Aug 2014 #43
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The Mystery of the Malays...»Reply #60