Thanks. I have snooped into MLK and RFK a little. I have not read any of Pepper's work, to my knowledge. King likely signed his death warrant when he began speaking out against the Vietnam War, and he was murdered exactly one year later. JFK was killed because he tried to end the Cold War, IMO, and even Nixon may have met his demise when he tried ending the Cold War. The spooks had a field day back then. It has changed since then, and I am not sure why. Before the Cold War ended, killing free-energy inventors was common, but that rarely happens any longer. I suspect that it is at least partly because they have the game well in hand and violence is a last resort, not the first. No need to get violent when the other tricks in the bag work and do not draw undue attention to untimely demises.
As long as King was making moral appeals to end segregation— perfectly legitimate in themselves - he was grudgingly tolerated by the establishment but once he moved Left with analysis of imperialism and its relationship to war and poverty he had to go.
Regarding Al Gore's comment: "We met with Al Gore at the White House, who declined any further interest in our technologies, calling them “too dangerous,” as he also has called free energy."
Gore was correct. Your technology was definitely too dangerous. Gore did not specify too dangerous for whom, though. It was too dangerous for him and his puppet string pulling managers and to the massive economic interests behind keeping technology like yours secret as long as possible. I predict that the only way we will know for sure when there is not enough cheap oil left underground is when the trillions of $$ of investments in petroleum disappear and reappear as investments in energy for the masses created by fusion (or whatever the next technology will be, and it is not clear to me yet that it must be by fusion).
Thanks Bill. Yes, it is "too dangerous" for those who dominate the world. We will see how it goes. It was kind of amazing to me to see that "too dangerous" language in his letter to Dennis, and then to see Greer repeat that exact same language from Gore. It is his stock response.
Regarding the MLK execution, the most comprehensive investigations are by William Pepper in his books.
Thanks. I have snooped into MLK and RFK a little. I have not read any of Pepper's work, to my knowledge. King likely signed his death warrant when he began speaking out against the Vietnam War, and he was murdered exactly one year later. JFK was killed because he tried to end the Cold War, IMO, and even Nixon may have met his demise when he tried ending the Cold War. The spooks had a field day back then. It has changed since then, and I am not sure why. Before the Cold War ended, killing free-energy inventors was common, but that rarely happens any longer. I suspect that it is at least partly because they have the game well in hand and violence is a last resort, not the first. No need to get violent when the other tricks in the bag work and do not draw undue attention to untimely demises.
As long as King was making moral appeals to end segregation— perfectly legitimate in themselves - he was grudgingly tolerated by the establishment but once he moved Left with analysis of imperialism and its relationship to war and poverty he had to go.
Agreed.
Regarding Al Gore's comment: "We met with Al Gore at the White House, who declined any further interest in our technologies, calling them “too dangerous,” as he also has called free energy."
Gore was correct. Your technology was definitely too dangerous. Gore did not specify too dangerous for whom, though. It was too dangerous for him and his puppet string pulling managers and to the massive economic interests behind keeping technology like yours secret as long as possible. I predict that the only way we will know for sure when there is not enough cheap oil left underground is when the trillions of $$ of investments in petroleum disappear and reappear as investments in energy for the masses created by fusion (or whatever the next technology will be, and it is not clear to me yet that it must be by fusion).
Thanks Bill. Yes, it is "too dangerous" for those who dominate the world. We will see how it goes. It was kind of amazing to me to see that "too dangerous" language in his letter to Dennis, and then to see Greer repeat that exact same language from Gore. It is his stock response.