Government-media lies: Three treasonous presidential cover-ups?
by LAWRENCE SELLIN, PHD
September 27, 2015
Although spanning nearly a century, these three apparent cover-ups have one main element in common, that despite massive evidence to the contrary, the government and media are still lying to us about them, one in real-time.
The power to make authoritative pronouncements, the power to manipulate the news by the release of false or misleading information, the power to interfere with an honest inquiry or the power to ridicule and casually sacrifice patriotic citizens; are all tactics the government and media have brought to bear to suppress the truth or prevent justice from ever entering a courtroom.
In May 1934, William A. Wirt, a Gary, Indiana schools superintendent, asserted before a Congressional committee that there was a plot among members of Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal administration to overthrow the established social order in the United States and substitute a communist-style planned economy (see "American Betrayal: The Secret Assault on Our Nation's Character" by Diana West).
For performing his patriotic duty, Wirt was branded a liar by committee Democrats, smeared by the press and even ridiculed by Roosevelt himself, a fate that would likewise befall future anti-communists.
Although the extent and negative consequences of communist infiltration and influence within the US government and the American press have always been dismissed and derided by the left, experts estimate the number of Americans assisting Soviet intelligence agencies during the 1930s and 1940s as exceeding five hundred, including high-ranking government officials such as Alger Hiss (State Department), Lauchlin Currie (White House), Harry Dexter White (Treasury) and Roosevelt's most intimate advisor, Harry Hopkins, who twice covertly passed vital secrets to the Soviets.
Likewise, anyone who has the temerity to believe that Lee Harvey Oswald was not the lone assassin of President John F. Kennedy is denounced as a conspiracy theorist or worse.
The Warren Commission unequivocally stated that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone assassin, who fired a total of three shots in 6.8 seconds from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building using a 6.5 mm Italian Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, even though, for example, the paraffin test of Oswald's face indicated that he had not fired a rifle.
The flaws in the Warren Commission report are far too many to enumerate and the evidence is far too flimsy to have resulted in a conviction. Nevertheless, the government and the media have persisted in granting it credence.
None of that matters, however, because the Warren Commission was not intended to conduct a serious investigation of the Kennedy assassination, but to prevent one, in order to conceal, what could be considered a coup d'état.
Many people rightfully believe that Lyndon B. Johnson was installed as President of the United States at the behest of powerful politically- and financially-motivated people; that John F. Kennedy and the patsy Lee Harvey Oswald were executed under the supervision of rogue elements of the Central Intelligence Agency who were facilitated by organized crime and officials in Texas; and that Johnson and federal law enforcement, in particular J. Edgar Hoover, orchestrated a cover-up in which the media willingly participated, all of which continues to this day (see "The Man Who Killed Kennedy: The Case Against LBJ" by Roger Stone and "Who Really Killed Kennedy" by Jerome R. Corsi).
Likewise, a conspiracy of silence and a blanket of disinformation has descended upon the public discourse, "taqiyya" or deception, if you will, regarding all questions related to Barack Obama's legal eligibility for the Presidency, his personal history and the circumstances and associates surrounding his ascension to power.
Although considered the equivalent of blasphemy by the political-media establishment, sending them into fits of rage or a case of the vapors, it is no stretch of the imagination to mention - and history may prove - that the policies of the Obama administration could reflect his own proclivities, those being in particular Marxism and Islam. At this point one can only speculate as to what might be driving the administration's aggressive lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender agenda, especially in regard to the military.
I would like to know, for example: was American communist Frank Marshall Davis Obama's real father; did Obama attend Occidental College as an Indonesian foreign exchange student; did he not register for Selective Service in 1980; did Middle East money facilitate and fund Obama's graduate education; what is his real Social Security number; why claim a computer-generated forgery as a genuine birth certificate; did Nancy Pelosi create two Certifications of Nomination in 2008, compared to the 2000 and 2004 documents to disguise Obama's ineligibility for the Presidency and what is the extent of Republican complicity in an alleged cover-up ?
Such questions may never be answered accurately, not to guard national security or protect the American people, but to maintain the power of a privileged ruling class.
Our so-called "leaders" in Washington DC and our "distinguished" journalists would rather risk the survival of the republic than risk the truth.