If the CIA murdered James Joseph Brown, who else did it not?
Posted: 15 Dec 2021, 19:55
A few days ago, I heard by chance during a morning news broadcast a report of an allegation that the late James Joseph Brown may have been murdered by the CIA. I googled about that news today and found the report online: James Brown said the CIA spied on him. The CIA won't say.
Whenever I hear an allegation, I take it as just that before hearing from the party against which the allegation is lodged. In this case, as any professional reporter should do, the reporter of this story has said that he has reached out to the CIA about the allegation. The taxpayer-funded agency wouldn't discuss it because it could "cause serious damage to US national security."
A few questions came to my mind upon hearing the report. The first that has stuck with me ever since is if it murdered Joseph James Brown, whose name mistakenly became James Joseph Brown, who else did it not?
I knew little about this man. Apparently, he was famous before I was born. However, a line in the story touched me the most. I am all for a peaceful protest, a peaceful expression of dissent. I see destructive rioting as destructive. I still remember when I heard the news about a police headquarters in Minneapolis put on fire about a year ago. I imagined the irreplaceable records in the building that could be of use to even the rioters, for the cause of the protest itself.
So, when I heard in this news report that he stood against rioting in Boston in 1968, he came across as a leader. Then again, he alleges that his act, presumably in good faith, put him under the surveillance of the taxpayer-funded agency because it believed that if he could stop rioting, he could start one just as easily. Damned if you do and damned if you don't gets a new definition here.
The second question is if the allegation that the CIA may have murdered him is without merit, intuition suggests that the agency would be at the forefront to clear its name. Understandably, the CIA of 1968 when James Brown alleged it put him under surveillance, the CIA of 2006 when James Brown died, and the CIA of 2021 when this report became public are not the same because of personnel changes.
So, the third question is assuming the American taxpayer-funded agency is an institution that is subordinate to the President of the United States of America, why doesn't Joseph Robinette Biden pass an immediate executive order that the agency that is under his command and implicated in murder clear its and his name immediately? Talk about dereliction of duty, failing to take an immediate and appropriate action in light of such grand allegations is such a clear one. Does he fear that the current Director of the agency may call him an SOB and go for his life?
The fourth question is what kind of taxpayers are American taxpayers that fund such premeditated actions against their own countrymen and countrywomen?
The fifth question is what kind of taxpayer-funded workers do not rise to protest that the agency to which they go to work clear its name from such a grand allegation immediately or call it quits?
The sixth question is about the individuals within the agency that make such decisions, in case the allegation has merit. Does it take an evolutionary consciousness to know that the murderers in such premeditated acts are the guilty ones and the murdered are the martyrs? How many martyrs do they have to see for them to see their nightmares?
Whenever I hear an allegation, I take it as just that before hearing from the party against which the allegation is lodged. In this case, as any professional reporter should do, the reporter of this story has said that he has reached out to the CIA about the allegation. The taxpayer-funded agency wouldn't discuss it because it could "cause serious damage to US national security."
A few questions came to my mind upon hearing the report. The first that has stuck with me ever since is if it murdered Joseph James Brown, whose name mistakenly became James Joseph Brown, who else did it not?
I knew little about this man. Apparently, he was famous before I was born. However, a line in the story touched me the most. I am all for a peaceful protest, a peaceful expression of dissent. I see destructive rioting as destructive. I still remember when I heard the news about a police headquarters in Minneapolis put on fire about a year ago. I imagined the irreplaceable records in the building that could be of use to even the rioters, for the cause of the protest itself.
So, when I heard in this news report that he stood against rioting in Boston in 1968, he came across as a leader. Then again, he alleges that his act, presumably in good faith, put him under the surveillance of the taxpayer-funded agency because it believed that if he could stop rioting, he could start one just as easily. Damned if you do and damned if you don't gets a new definition here.
The second question is if the allegation that the CIA may have murdered him is without merit, intuition suggests that the agency would be at the forefront to clear its name. Understandably, the CIA of 1968 when James Brown alleged it put him under surveillance, the CIA of 2006 when James Brown died, and the CIA of 2021 when this report became public are not the same because of personnel changes.
So, the third question is assuming the American taxpayer-funded agency is an institution that is subordinate to the President of the United States of America, why doesn't Joseph Robinette Biden pass an immediate executive order that the agency that is under his command and implicated in murder clear its and his name immediately? Talk about dereliction of duty, failing to take an immediate and appropriate action in light of such grand allegations is such a clear one. Does he fear that the current Director of the agency may call him an SOB and go for his life?
The fourth question is what kind of taxpayers are American taxpayers that fund such premeditated actions against their own countrymen and countrywomen?
The fifth question is what kind of taxpayer-funded workers do not rise to protest that the agency to which they go to work clear its name from such a grand allegation immediately or call it quits?
The sixth question is about the individuals within the agency that make such decisions, in case the allegation has merit. Does it take an evolutionary consciousness to know that the murderers in such premeditated acts are the guilty ones and the murdered are the martyrs? How many martyrs do they have to see for them to see their nightmares?