11-04-2010, 01:31 PM
John,
The answers to cui bono in this case lead us far beyond U.S. shores. And the removal of Khrushchev from power is, in my relatively informed opinion, not accidental in its timing vis a vis the far bloodier removal of Kennedy.
To begin the process of exploring this hypothesis, we must reject the notion of a monolithic Soviet power structure -- again, a fictive construct central to the Cold War propaganda that itself was a key component in the operations to maintain anti-Soviet fears and tensions among Western populations.
Rival factions and philosophies within ostensibly cohesive political/philosophical structures were present in both the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. during the period we study. They were alive and well in "Castro's" Cuba, too. As they are today.
Although it's a dangerous journey, I suggest that you make your way throught Joseph J. Trento's The Secret History of the CIA. If you can avoid stepping on disinformation mines, you will find clues that in time will lead you into the belly of the beast. Dick Russell's superb The Man Who Knew Too Much cannot be fully appreciated until its evidence to support my contentions is contemplated. And of course A Certain Arrogance, by George Michael Evica, directly and powerfully addresses this issue (for the latter, wait until the TrineDay edition is released sometime this summer).
And you could do worse than watch The Package -- arguably the most revealing and well-informed fictional reimagining of the JFK assassination, and a most profound dramatization of the non-national (as opposed to international) forces behind the events of 11/22/63.
You ask if I "believe that intelligence agencies, organized crime, the drug trade [were] controlled or directed in some way by the sponsors".
If you meant to add "during the formulation, execution, and cover-up of the assassination," my answer is "yes."
Then again, it would be "yes" even if you didn't.
As for metaphors: They abound in our areas of study, from puppet masters to octopuses. Take your pick.
Hope this helps.
The answers to cui bono in this case lead us far beyond U.S. shores. And the removal of Khrushchev from power is, in my relatively informed opinion, not accidental in its timing vis a vis the far bloodier removal of Kennedy.
To begin the process of exploring this hypothesis, we must reject the notion of a monolithic Soviet power structure -- again, a fictive construct central to the Cold War propaganda that itself was a key component in the operations to maintain anti-Soviet fears and tensions among Western populations.
Rival factions and philosophies within ostensibly cohesive political/philosophical structures were present in both the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. during the period we study. They were alive and well in "Castro's" Cuba, too. As they are today.
Although it's a dangerous journey, I suggest that you make your way throught Joseph J. Trento's The Secret History of the CIA. If you can avoid stepping on disinformation mines, you will find clues that in time will lead you into the belly of the beast. Dick Russell's superb The Man Who Knew Too Much cannot be fully appreciated until its evidence to support my contentions is contemplated. And of course A Certain Arrogance, by George Michael Evica, directly and powerfully addresses this issue (for the latter, wait until the TrineDay edition is released sometime this summer).
And you could do worse than watch The Package -- arguably the most revealing and well-informed fictional reimagining of the JFK assassination, and a most profound dramatization of the non-national (as opposed to international) forces behind the events of 11/22/63.
You ask if I "believe that intelligence agencies, organized crime, the drug trade [were] controlled or directed in some way by the sponsors".
If you meant to add "during the formulation, execution, and cover-up of the assassination," my answer is "yes."
Then again, it would be "yes" even if you didn't.
As for metaphors: They abound in our areas of study, from puppet masters to octopuses. Take your pick.
Hope this helps.