02-11-2013, 08:48 PM
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:Interesting post. I think that G.M Evica was right to state that Rockefeller was essentially the Establishment front man for a plot that transcended national borders and Cold War differences. This is where the Sponsorship level of the assassination truly lies in my opinion (although it must be remembered that the individuals in question are in many ways simply the latest manifestation of a phenomenon that has been with us for millennia...)
This is what I am beginning to lean to today. That is was not just about Cuba, not even just about Vietnam, not just about detente with USSR. But including all of that and more. That was the idea behind my talk in Pittsburgh, which i will be repeating in Dallas.
And it goes to the heart of who Kennedy really was and the battle over his image. Which is as bitterly fought over as the forensics of the JFK case. And which many people on our side do not fully understand. E.g. Anthony Summers.
Jim, I think you are definitely heading in the right direction with this approach.
Globalism and "Free Trade" have been the dominant ideologies of the transnational ruling classes for a long time, and Kennedy was stalling those agendas in a big way. He was also attempting to reign in big business within the U.S. and was promoting always bad-for-business ideas of peace, neutrality and national sovereignty. A dangerous mix.
The story of Watergate and the takedown of Nixon can also be viewed through the same lens. See this video interview with Jon Rappoport (from about 10 minutes onwards) for a detailed explication of this idea:
[video=youtube_share;XBZzu7q67AQ]http://youtu.be/XBZzu7q67AQ[/video]
“The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him.â€
― Leo Tolstoy,
― Leo Tolstoy,