A Coup Against or By the State?

[Charles Drago]

Was the murder of JFK a coup against the state/system or an instance of the self-correcting state/system righting itself?

Did JFK embody the pre-existing state/system or a mortal threat to it?

Those who killed JFK did not emerge in 1963 as new players. They were/are the long-established state/system which JFK endangered.

By killing JFK the assassination's sponsors did not take control of the state/system, but rather consolidated and strengthened their control.

It is we who threaten their national security.

[Mark Stapleton]

Was the murder of JFK a coup against the state/system or an instance of the self-correcting state/system righting itself?

Did JFK embody the pre-existing state/system or a mortal threat to it?

Those who killed JFK did not emerge in 1963 as new players. They were/are the long-established state/system which JFK endangered.

By killing JFK the assassination's sponsors did not take control of the state/system, but rather consolidated and strengthened their control.

It is we who threaten their national security.

Q.1: The latter.

Q. 2: I think he embodied the idealism of the American political system but what he and those millions of idealists failed to understand was the intrinsic greed and corruption of human nature.

Therefore, my unequivocal answer to your question is that he represented a mortal threat to the ruling elite and their carefully cultivated deception, known as democracy.

Para 3: I agree.

Para 4: I agree.

Para 5: I agree. Informed individuals are a great threat to the power elite. They can see when a policy initiative has no logic or benefit for the common good. Especially on forums like this, because unlike professional journalists and commentators, we have no boss to answer to and therefore can't be corrupted or coerced---at least initially. No names mentioned.

[Peter Lemkin]

Was the murder of JFK a coup against the state/system or an instance of the self-correcting state/system righting itself?

Did JFK embody the pre-existing state/system or a mortal threat to it?

Those who killed JFK did not emerge in 1963 as new players. They were/are the long-established state/system which JFK endangered.

By killing JFK the assassination's sponsors did not take control of the state/system, but rather consolidated and strengthened their control.

It is we who threaten their national security.

Good questions.

1] While it was a coup against the public 'state', it was a self-correcting of the 'secret' state, IMO.

2] JFK, while an insider was moving away from the goals and control of the deep political state - if ever so slightly - that was 'enough'. In his modified condition, he was perceived as a threat.

3] In our 'system' the real powers don't take office, and those in office are their frontmen and women [if they didn't know this before election - they know if soon after]. While no one [nor group] yelled 'I took him out and now I'm the boss!'; the way it was done - so blatently in public - so obviously not the by the official fairytale (to others in high office) - it was enough for all those others to know (or sense) what was what; that the real powers were redoubling their position and ending any threats or rougues. Those who followed JFK were much more careful, afraid and controlled. Yes, those who re-consolidated their power had been a rather solid block since before WWII; and in other forms since Americas earliest years, and the very dawn of what passes for 'civilization' [sic].

4] Yes, it is we who seek the truth and to expose and tell it to others who are perceived as a threat to those behind the curtain. Their security [sic] is not 'national' - they are only a handful [.01% of the population - or less]. They don't want to be exposed - nor their lies, deceptions and control made too obvious. It is OK if they are felt - but should not be clearly seen - and certainly not documented nor expounded upon in order to change the system of control. How many dead; and how many with their lives ruined for attempting this - or only for their bearing truthful witness?!.....all too many.

[Dawn Meredith]

Was the murder of JFK a coup against the state/system or an instance of the self-correcting state/system righting itself?

Did JFK embody the pre-existing state/system or a mortal threat to it?

Those who killed JFK did not emerge in 1963 as new players. They were/are the long-established state/system which JFK endangered.

By killing JFK the assassination's sponsors did not take control of the state/system, but rather consolidated and strengthened their control.

It is we who threaten their national security.

I agree with all the comments posted on this thread save for CD's last statement. We are no threat. That is why they let us be. There are no true threats to their control. If someone like a JFK were to come along again he'd be taken out in an instant and the public would again go for the lie. Now if our numbers were to grow and MSM (etc.) began to write the truth, then we could become a threat, but in my 45 years of living this I have not seen that occur, except in very rare instances. EG Former governor Jesse Ventura.
Dawn

[Charles Drago]

Semantics again, Dawn.

We do pose a threat -- but to date an ineffectual one that is taken advantage of by the killers of JFK.

In permitting us to rant and rave, they preserve the illusions of free speech and democracy in the U.S. even as their bought-and-paid-for defenders keep us on the margins of academic and intellectual respectability so that, in the event that through some miracle we threaten to put up a meaningful fight, we can be quickly dismissed as "conspiracists" from the lunatic fringe.

But make no mistake: The arc of the universe does indeed bend toward justice, and with every word we speak and write we move along that arc.

But time's a'waistin', podners.

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

Agreed that we are no threat, but there are examples of individuals who have been perceived as such.

Part of what constitutes the threat, is how the information is communicated.

It it simply stays in isolated "silos" of information then it is less dangerous, even if there are a lot of important revelations contained in the silos.

Just step sideways--i.e. connect sites like this one to others using headlines that connect the dots in terms of relevance and legitimation for a targetted audience-- that could be seen as dangerous.

Of course it is also possible that I am trying to leverage my McIdentity one tough internet hombre, not that such points need belaboring!

[Dawn Meredith]

Agreed that we are no threat, but there are examples of individuals who have been perceived as such.

Part of what constitutes the threat, is how the information is communicated.

It it simply stays in isolated "silos" of information then it is less dangerous, even if there are a lot of important revelations contained in the silos.

Just step sideways--i.e. connect sites like this one to others using headlines that connect the dots in terms of relevance and legitimation for a targetted audience-- that could be seen as dangerous.

Of course it is also possible that I am trying to leverage my McIdentity one tough internet hombre, not that such points need belaboring!

Jim Garrison posed such a threat. And CD is completely right here, his persistance by writing "On The Trial.." the book that became the film caused several things to occur. A new generation became aware of this official lie. A demand for documents lead to the AARB, which lead to millions of pages being released and that "movement" paved the way for journalists like David Talbot and Jeff Morley. So, there has been some movement. There have been people who have been threats. (Look at what they are doing to Cyril Wecht).
And yes the universe so arcs.
Dawn

ps An old friend of mine who was deeply interested in all things conspiracy just wrote me that he now no longer has the time. You MAKE the time. If justice is not a priority then there is no hope.

[Peter Lemkin]

ps An old friend of mine who was deeply interested in all things conspiracy just wrote me that he now no longer has the time. You MAKE the time. If justice is not a priority then there is no hope.

Good point. The naicent Very Great Depression has two purposes, IMO: first to more quickly transfer money from the rest of us to the ultra-rich and secondly, to make most too busy trying to keep alive [literally], fed and sheltered to even think of anything other. But I agree with Dawn, until one is in that lowly state, if justice and making the country and world more just is not a priority, then you are part of the problem and not part of the solution.

As to 'we' being a threat - it was unclear if we meant all non-Oligarchs or if we meant those of us who actively challenge Oligarchy. Yes, they don't usually feel threatened, but I've lost a few friends and know of others killed or their lives destroyed because they became a threat. JFK was. RFK was, MKL was, many witnesses were, Casselero was, et al. Many others were. However, if we get a critical mass of persons in opposition to this cabal, they can do nothing. Standing alone - or with only a few others - we can be picked-off one at a time and with impunity.

[Charles Drago]

Enjoy your holiday turkey.

And ...

DUCK!

[Dawn Meredith]

Exactly why have we been largely unsuccessful? The obvious answers: refusal by the government to permit the truth, marginalized by the corporate media, apathy on the part of the public provides some of the answers.
Two larger issues present: (1) The public sees this as "ancient history" and does not put this act of official treason into a context that explains how we got here today, and what it all means.
(2) Divisions among us, the research community.
Thus far this forum is largely unified. For myself this is a unique experience. I have been in and around the assassination research community all of my adult life and the divisions never ceased to astound me. I accepted early on- as it was obvious- that many "researchers" were in fact agents whose purpose was to sow dissent. The media has utilized this to our great disadvantage with falsehoods like "there are as many theories as there are critics". Admittedly there are a few crackpot theories out there, total disinformation-( "Castro did it" comes to mind )- and I see one as of our goals at DPF is the creation of a unified research community whose goal is advancing the truth: As put by Jim Douglas "why he died and why it matters". I personally believe that it is also important that this be accomplished during the period of time where there are many still living who remember. Otherwise this will be like the Lincoln assassination.

Then we follow multiple directions: reaching out to members of the media, members of the government, etc. We have a few things on our side: The public at large has known for forty five years that the WC was a lie, we have a DA in Dallas who has gone on record that he never believed the official version. We have had many in government over the years who went on record with his/her disbelief in the WC fairytale. Had this not been so there would have not been a HSCA. HSCA's errors are our history lesson. And we know EXACTLY what "went wrong" with HSCA. (For those who do not a must read is Gaeton Fonzi's book The Last Investigation).

We have the truth on our side, and truth ultimately prevails.

Dawn