26-07-2009, 04:35 PM
Charles Drago Wrote:Douglass' JFKU as the "best account" of the event?
Not even close.
As the best argument for the sponsors' ultimate motive?
Absolutely.
I often think of my friend Professor Evica, but I miss him most intensely whenever discussions take place regarding John Kennedy's spiritual awakening.
George Michael and I spoke of this often over a 15-year period. We came to understand that the enlightened spirit savagely evicted from the human host on 11/22/63 could not be allowed to continue its in-body evolution if the forces of materialism were to prevail.
Sound like a Harry Potter plot?
At times JFKU falters in its deep political analyses (Douglass' Chicago plot conclusions, for example, are simplistic and wholly inconsistent with his deeper understanding regarding the overall structure of the assassination conspiracy).
Evica and Scott are significantly more insightful in their respective penetrations of the operational levels of the hit.
What makes JFKU a truly and uniquely important contribution to the canon is its powerful meditations on the ancient and ongoing battle between spiritual and material world views and the reasons why John Kennedy was destined to be slaughtered in that conflict.
I might add that, while the Cuban Missile Crisis is often and glibly cited as the catalyst for JFK's awakening, George Michael and I agreed that an equally significant event was the death of his and Mrs. Kennedy's third child, Patrick.
Observe how their love -- and, by extension, their marriage -- seemed to be renewed in the wake of that tragedy.
Why didn't sexual blackmail and threats of death deter John Kennedy?
By that too-long autumn of 1963, the only force that could stop him was death itself -- in the form of a base element of the earth driven into the very temple of his spirit.
Interesting Charlie. I never considered the death of Patrick to be a factor in JFK's political evolution and therefore the '63 coup. Will you elaborate on that? Is there a book that discusses this aspect or did it only come out in discussions? What is this theory based on?
And to clarify, are you saying that Douglass' evaluation is inaccurate or merely incomplete?