Re: JFK: Why he died, and why it matters today
Subject: Re: JFK: Why he died, and why it matters today
From: Arthur Preacher
Date: 22/11/2010, 18:09
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.alien.research,alt.paranet.ufo,sci.skeptic,alt.conspiracy

On Nov 21, 10:47 pm, "A" <a...@att.net> wrote:
John F. Kennedy, a Man of Peace who single-handedly (with Khrushchev in the
U.S.S.R.) avoided World War 3 in Oct. 1962.

"Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God."
--Matthew 5:9 (American King James Version)

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig10/curtin1.1.1.html

"JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters"
by Edward Curtin

Nov. 28, 2009

"Despite a treasure-trove of new information having emerged over the last
forty-six years, there are many people who still think who killed President
John Fitzgerald Kennedy and why are unanswerable questions. There are others
who cling to the Lee Harvey Oswald "lone-nut" explanation proffered by the
Warren Commission. Both groups agree, however, that whatever the truth, it
has no contemporary relevance but is old-hat, history, stuff for
conspiracy-obsessed people with nothing better to do. The general thinking
is that the assassination occurred almost a half-century ago, so let's move
on.

Nothing could be further from the truth, as James Douglass shows in his
extraordinary book, JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters
(Orbis Books, 2008). [*] It is clearly one of the best books ever written on
the Kennedy assassination and deserves a vast readership. It is bound to
roil the waters of complacency that have submerged the truth of this key
event in
modern American history.

"...Douglass presents a very compelling argument that Kennedy was killed by
"unspeakable" (the Trappist monk Thomas Merton's term) forces within the
U.S. national security state because of his conversion from a cold warrior
into a man of peace. He argues, using a wealth of newly uncovered
information, that JFK had become a major threat to the burgeoning
military-industrial complex and had to be eliminated through a conspiracy
planned by the CIA - "the CIA's fingerprints are all over the crime and the
events leading up to it" - not by a crazed individual, the Mafia, or
disgruntled anti-Castro Cubans, though some of these may have been used in
the execution of the plot.

"...Let's look at the history marshaled by [James] Douglass to support his
thesis.

First, Kennedy, who took office in January 1961 as somewhat of a Cold
Warrior, was quickly set up by the CIA to take the blame for the Bay of Pigs
invasion of Cuba in April 1961. The CIA and generals wanted to oust Castro,
and in pursuit of that goal, trained a force of Cuban exiles to invade Cuba.
Kennedy refused to go along and the invasion was roundly defeated. The CIA,
military, and Cuban exiles bitterly blamed Kennedy. But it was all a sham.

Though Douglass doesn't mention it, and few Americans know it, classified
documents uncovered in 2000 revealed that the CIA had discovered that the
Soviets had learned of the date of the invasion more than a week in advance,
had informed Castro, but - and here is a startling fact that should make
people's hair stand on end - never told the President. The CIA knew the
invasion was doomed before the fact but went ahead with it anyway. Why? So
they could and did afterwards blame JFK for the failure.

This treachery set the stage for events to come. For his part, sensing but
not knowing the full extent of the set-up, Kennedy fired CIA Director Allen
Dulles (as in a bad joke, later to be named to the Warren Commission) and
his assistant General Charles Cabell (whose brother Earle Cabell, to make a
bad joke absurd, was the mayor of Dallas on the day Kennedy was killed) and
said he wanted "to splinter the CIA in a thousand pieces and scatter it to
the winds." Not the sentiments to endear him to a secretive government
within a government whose power was growing exponentially.

The stage was now set for events to follow as JFK, in opposition to nearly
all his advisers, consistently opposed the use of force in U.S. foreign
policy.

In 1961, despite the Joint Chief's demand to put troops into Laos, Kennedy
bluntly insisted otherwise as he ordered Averell Harriman, his
representative at the Geneva Conference, "Did you understand? I want a
negotiated settlement in Laos. I don't want to put troops in."

Also in 1961, he refused to concede to the insistence of his top generals to
give them permission to use nuclear weapons in Berlin and Southeast Asia.
Walking out of a meeting with top military advisors, Kennedy threw his hands
in the air and said, "These people are crazy."

He refused to bomb and invade Cuba as the military wished during the Cuban
missile crisis in 1962. Afterwards he told his friend John Kenneth Galbraith
that "I never had the slightest intention of doing so."

Then in June 1963 he gave an incredible speech at American University [1] in
which he called for the total abolishment of nuclear weapons, the end of the
Cold War and the "Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of
war," and movement toward "general and complete disarmament."

A few months later he signed a Limited Test Ban Treaty with Nikita
Khrushchev.

In October 1963 he signed National Security Action Memorandum 263 calling
for the withdrawal of 1,000 U. S. military troops from Vietnam by the end of
the year and a total withdrawal by the end of 1965. ..."  [**]

[*]http://www.amazon.com/dp/1570757550?tag=lewrockwell&camp=14573&creati...

[1]http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/jfkamericanuniversityaddress...

[**]http://www.jfklancer.com/NSAM263.html(Oct. 11, 1963)