Seamus Coogan on John Hankey

[Bob]

CTKA has finally released this story by our own Seamus Coogan...http://www.ctka.net/2010/hanky.htmlPlease read the story and give your take. That is what I will do. Before I do so, I do want to say that I had always liked John Hankey up to this point. I don't know a lot about Hankey, but I do know that he was good enough to be a guest on Black Op Radio in 2009, so he obviously passed the Len Osanic smell test. Hankey was also at the 2006 COPA convention as well...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1y6qh3Q ... =relatedSo Hankey obviously passed the John Judge smell test.With all that being said, I respect Seamus a lot and will check out his article. Please do the same.

[Dealey Joe]

Seamus well done and thorough research on Hanky's findings or lack off.I think a lot of these researcher get caught up not getting their facts straight.and rush to publication. I think very little is set in stone.Congratulations I liked it.

[Bob]

Seamus' story was a long and very well thought out essay. I don't agree with everything in the story however. For one, Seamus mentions Alex Jones. I certainly don't agree with Alex on certain subject matters, but he has had on great guests on his program, including Jesse Ventura, Jim Marrs, Robert Groden and others. I am one that believes that ALL should be allowed a forum to voice their views, even ones that I don't necessarily agree with. Alex's show gives us that forum. Now in terms of Seamus' take on John Hankey, he brings up many valid points. Hankey makes some errors no doubt and some of his assumptions are somewhat laughable. However, like Shawn O' Sullivan's documentary on the RFK assassination, even with his errors, his overall premise is correct. I also believe that the Bush family is more sordidly involved in history, than Seamus gives them credit for. Seamus and I have discussed this subject many times. Bottom line, Seamus uncovers a lot of errors with Hankey and other data during his essay. Most I agree with, while some I don't. Again, I feel that Hankey is more right than wrong overall with his premise. Still, I think it is a noble effort by Seamus to make sure sure that a member of the CT team gets his facts right. The overall premise of the CT team is correct...the JFK assassination was a conspiracy. How it came to be and how it was covered up is open to debate. Seamus is doing his part. Too bad no one of the LN team does the same thing when they put on a new program on the Discovery channel, or something is written by Dave Perry or John McAdams. The LN club just nod their heads, drink their kool aid and shuffle off like sheeple. Debate is good. Finally NO ONE is perfect. However, while one is trying to chase perfection, one can catch excellence. That is what the CT team is striving towards. However, we must NOT infight. We must respectfully debate our point of views, whether at COPA, Black Op Radio, CTKA or sites like this one. That being said, I hope John Hankey is allowed a chance to respond to Seamus' essay. That is what good debate is ALL about.

[turtleman]

For the most part I think very highly of Seamus' work but I have a hard time following an argument trying to exonerate the Bush's from anything. I don't understand his motivation but I guess he is trying to be fair. You don't have to get far into Russ Baker's Family of Secrets to see Poppy's bizarre behavior trying to cover his tracks on 11/22/63. Just because 41's fingerprints aren't all over something doesn't mean he wasn't up to his neck in it Iran/Contra. My head starts to hurt when I think of all he might be involved in. But I do think Seamus is a quite brilliant researcher despite my rather slanted opinion of Poppy.

[ThomZajac]

We all have our blind spots- Seamus (and myself) included of course.

[Michael Dell]

I've been visiting the forum for a while now, but it wasn't until I saw this thread that I felt compelled to register and interact. So I reckon I owe Mr. Coogan that much. First, I should state I've interviewed John Hankey in the past, and I find him to be a swell fella. He's doing what he can to help raise consciousness and expose political corruption. He should be admired for his courage. Not many are as willing to expose themselves to such scrutiny. And let me say I appreciate Mr. Coogan's attempts to hold all JFK material to the highest possible standard. However, I think everyone within the JFK community should be treated with respect. We're in this together. Extend a helping hand, not a closed fist. Mr. Coogan's review of Mr. Hankey's work was filled with condescension, arrogance, and petty personal attacks. There was clearly an agenda present. The piece's overall tone undercut any valid points. By the end, it became nothing more than a tribute to Mr. Coogan's own ego. Is our goal to find truth or to prove how smart we are? This constant bickering and in-fighting is crippling any attempt to expose truth. Why should the average person give us "conspiracy nuts" any respect when we don't offer it to each other? It's pointless even visiting many JFK forums these days because all one reads are vicious personal attacks disguised as research. And the minute someone offers up a different view on something, they're labeled "crazy" or an "idiot." I think hearing Len Osanic and James DiEugenio on Black Op Radio bury Mr. Hankey while praising Mr. Coogan's review sent me over the edge. I'm tempted to pen a response to Mr. Coogan in a similar fashion as his piece, unleashing sarcasm and derision at each turn and ridiculing him for thinking George Bush was just a "businessman living in Houston" or for insisting upon the "whole Secret Society fallacy" or for calling a connection to 9/11 "preposterous." But there's nothing to be gained. I would just hate for Mr. Coogan's review to unfairly tarnish Mr. Hankey's contributions to the community or to prevent others from experiencing Mr. Hankey's films and deciding for themselves.

[bob franklin]

Trying to read Mr Coogan's essay in the interest of impartiality, I stopped halfway through. I could go no further. there was little to be found there, save vitriol and character assassination. My own thoughts are in harmony with those of Mr Dell. Not having the research foundation of my fellow forum members (whom I self indulgently like to think of as my peers), I never the less have done some reading up on the Kennedy murders and the players involved. To claim that bush41 was not involved in a huge way is to deny the Brown brothers Harriman connection to the bushes an CIA, & by extension the assassination of Three kennedys. I mention reading because one of the clearest indicators of Bush involvement has to be "George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography". I heartily endorse this book as reading material for Seamus, if he hasn't looked it over already. I'll have to go to BOR & listen to the broadcast mentioned above as I have some difficulty believing that Len Osanic and Jim DiEugenio would also be party to this.It is not my intention to start a range war or cause hostilities. I merely wish to extend my support to John Hankey, Whom I deeply respect & look to as a true researcher

[Michael Dell]

bob franklin wrote:I'll have to go to BOR & listen to the broadcast mentioned above as I have some difficulty believing that Len Osanic and Jim DiEugenio would also be party to this.It starts about 7 minutes into part two of the February 11th episode. Mr. DiEugenio doesn't just praise Mr. Coogan, he actually laughs at Mr. Hankey. And Mr. Osanic, while he doesn't join in the mockery, does little to defend a man he has had on his show more than once. I found the whole exchange rather despicable.

[Bob]

Michael Dell wrote:bob franklin wrote:I'll have to go to BOR & listen to the broadcast mentioned above as I have some difficulty believing that Len Osanic and Jim DiEugenio would also be party to this.It starts about 7 minutes into part two of the February 11th episode. Mr. DiEugenio doesn't just praise Mr. Coogan, he actually laughs at Mr. Hankey. And Mr. Osanic, while he doesn't join in the mockery, does little to defend a man he has had on his show more than once. I found the whole exchange rather despicable.I believe the exchange that you are talking about Michael refers to a section where Jim talks about a belief where John mentions that Allen Dulles was a figure head in running the CIA, and was really beholden to Prescott Bu$h. I'm not sure I believe that either, but Prescott Bu$h was a VERY powerful individual, and he ran in the same Nazi circles that the Dulles brothers did during WWII. So there IS a definite connection. Again, Prescott Bu$h was charged with trading with the enemy in 1942 by the U.S. government. The enemy being Nazi Germany. That was all swept under the rug by the MSM as Bu$h later became a politician. The same holds true with the Dulles brothers who had clear Nazi connections, yet one became the leader of the CIA, while the other became the Secretary of State under President Eisenhower. Also, somehow Poppy Bu$h rose to a very high profile in the CIA in the late 50's and early 60's. That speaks a LOT of the relationship between Allen Dulles and Prescott Bu$h. As I have said earlier, I think Seamus has not put enough emphasis on the Bu$h family in his thesis, as they were clearly major contributors to the whole sordid affair. Operation or Group 40 was an assassination group put together by the CIA. Poppy Bu$h was a recruiter for that operation. Poppy was clearly in Dallas on 11/22/1963, along with some members of Group 40. Finally in his essay, Seamus sees no connection between the JFK assassination and 9/11. Seamus is also from New Zealand and not from the United States, so understand his perspective. But in my opinion, he is wrong. The biggest evidence of that CLEAR connection is Operation Northwoods...http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICL ... s.htmlTake a good look at the plan. A REAL good look. This was a plan that ALL the joint chiefs wanted to take place. It was also endorsed by Allen Dulles and the Bu$h boys as well. This plan was given to JFK in March of 1962. JFK refused to implement this horrific idea. But an incompetent dolt that stole an election in 2000 named Dumbya Bu$h didn't refuse. Operation Northwoods was almost a blueprint for the events that happened on 9/11/2001. Instead of Cuba in 1962, it was Afghanistan and Iraq in 2001. It is now 2010, and we are still there. The CIA is happy. The war profiteers are happy. The military industrial complex is happy. Meanwhile, the MSM still sleeps, just like they have since the JFK assassination.

[Michael Dell]

Bob, yeah, I agree with everything you said. You're preaching to the choir, my friend. By the way, I've always enjoyed reading your posts during my time watching the forum, so it's nice to finally interact with you. And John Hankey has contacted CTKA to see if they'd be interested in his response to Mr. Coogan's review. Hopefully they'll provide him the opportunity...