Vancouver-bound author James Douglass on JFK and the Unspeakable

[Peter Lemkin]

Charles, I sort of agree and sort of don't. The Big Boys of Big Finance and Hidden Power are, yes, pretty much 'above' definition as having allegiance to country X or Y or Z. That said, they do [usually] have a primary interest in one or two - some a few. Yes, when they have wars they usually arm both sides and play the 'game' so that they will win no matter what happens, but they also usually have a favored side to win - which usually wins. At times these Big Guys have differing favored sides [such as during WW2], BUT had a certain collegiality despite this and treated it more as a horse-race than a War in which hundreds of millions were killed - many placed 'bets' on both sides - but most had a favored side; however, when one side one they ALL got along just fine with that new reality and did what they did to reap profits from it. All that said [and similar continues in some form to this day], the JFK hit seems to me to have had a very American 'flavor'. I'm not saying that some who were not American per se or some who truly are supra-national were not involved in agreeing they didn't want JFK nor Peace etc. However, I think the predominant players in that action [Not ALL Big Boys play all games in the Grand Casino, at any given time] were more affiliated with the USA than not. Of course they have European and Asian and other interests. The Planet is their playground and poker table. I don't see the Big Boys, worldwide as absolutely monolithic, but they rarely fight....they just back different objectives at different times and as long as they all make money they leave the others to do what they want. At times they mostly all work in concert. At other times they have separate playgrounds. On JFK, I sense more of an American tllt, but others were involved and backed the objectives of getting rid of JFK and what he stood for. He was bad for business as usual. 'Leaders' are to follow - not lead...or they get wiped off the map more times than not. The real interests of the majority of the People are not figured into the equation and populist leaders don't usually last long - less so in big or 'strategic' countries; big or strategic areas smaller than countries. It is less a 'Grand Chessboard' than a 'Grand Casino' IMO.