20-02-2011, 05:24 PM
On another of my "hypothesis" threads -- "JFK Blackmailed as a "Soviet Agent?"
( https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/sho...Hypothesis )
-- I asked one and all to consider the possibility that it was the threat of exposure not of sexual recklessness, but rather his possible ideological dalliance with Marxism during the period of his higher education, that was used to control John Kennedy into his presidential years.
An alternate scenario would substitute Nazism for Marxism. Or combine them.
Enter Inga Arvad -- if you'll excuse the expression.
Given all that we know about the way the deep political world operates, it is almost inconceivable that young Jack Kennedy would not have been considered a prime target of opportunity for OSS -- opportunistic secret servants.
Of all persuasions.
Whether or not an earlier Red recruitment -- or a Western operation designed to look like one -- had come close to snaring JFK, the Nazis would have seen the promiscuous son of the politically and economically formidable former U.S. ambassador to the Court of Saint James much as the Russians likely saw him: a prize catch.
A bankable asset.
Or was the Arvad affair simply a wet operation of the oldest, literal kind -- one that Soviet, Nazi, British, AND/OR American intelligence services co-opted and broadly fictionalized into any number of scenarios for later use?
The sexual element of an Arvad-baited honeytrap was not an end unto itself, I'd argue, but rather the means to achieve the sort of control which a good old fashioned boy-bops-girl scandal could not hope to provide -- but which fabricated evidence of treason most foul would deliver handily.
And let us not overlook the value of (tall) tales of JFK's communist AND Nazi dalliances for their value as doppelgangers of sorts -- and for the cognitive and emotional dissonances they provoke to this day.
I've attached an assortment of Arvad photos for review.
Included is a shot of Arvad and Adolph. Look at this one closely. Do you agree with me that it is a composite -- a fake -- given away by out-of-scale heads and torsos, inconsistent lighting, etc.?
Yes, we all know the stories of Arvad's two interviews with Hitler and her presence in his private box at the 1936 Olympics. But the intimacy captured in what I see as a faked photo reeks of an intel prop -- one to be utilized if and when a photo of JFK and Arvad was released.
Such as the one also seen below, which I recently discovered on the Internet. This too has all the appearances of a clumsy fabrication.
How might we expect JFK to have reacted to ideological blackmail in 1960? Quite differently than he would have reacted in 1963, I'd wager.
Again, I wish to be unequivocal on this point: I do NOT believe that JFK was a communist or a Nazi sympathizer or agent.
I do believe that, as his father's promiscuous son, JFK was targeted by intelligence services -- including those of his own country and/or its allies -- long before he first ran for political office.
How could he not have been?
But all of this may be moot if, as I've ventured in a previous "hypothesis" thread, President John Fitzgerald Kennedy was marked for public execution for reasons that transcend superficial political and economic realities.
( https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/sho...Hypothesis )
-- I asked one and all to consider the possibility that it was the threat of exposure not of sexual recklessness, but rather his possible ideological dalliance with Marxism during the period of his higher education, that was used to control John Kennedy into his presidential years.
An alternate scenario would substitute Nazism for Marxism. Or combine them.
Enter Inga Arvad -- if you'll excuse the expression.
Given all that we know about the way the deep political world operates, it is almost inconceivable that young Jack Kennedy would not have been considered a prime target of opportunity for OSS -- opportunistic secret servants.
Of all persuasions.
Whether or not an earlier Red recruitment -- or a Western operation designed to look like one -- had come close to snaring JFK, the Nazis would have seen the promiscuous son of the politically and economically formidable former U.S. ambassador to the Court of Saint James much as the Russians likely saw him: a prize catch.
A bankable asset.
Or was the Arvad affair simply a wet operation of the oldest, literal kind -- one that Soviet, Nazi, British, AND/OR American intelligence services co-opted and broadly fictionalized into any number of scenarios for later use?
The sexual element of an Arvad-baited honeytrap was not an end unto itself, I'd argue, but rather the means to achieve the sort of control which a good old fashioned boy-bops-girl scandal could not hope to provide -- but which fabricated evidence of treason most foul would deliver handily.
And let us not overlook the value of (tall) tales of JFK's communist AND Nazi dalliances for their value as doppelgangers of sorts -- and for the cognitive and emotional dissonances they provoke to this day.
I've attached an assortment of Arvad photos for review.
Included is a shot of Arvad and Adolph. Look at this one closely. Do you agree with me that it is a composite -- a fake -- given away by out-of-scale heads and torsos, inconsistent lighting, etc.?
Yes, we all know the stories of Arvad's two interviews with Hitler and her presence in his private box at the 1936 Olympics. But the intimacy captured in what I see as a faked photo reeks of an intel prop -- one to be utilized if and when a photo of JFK and Arvad was released.
Such as the one also seen below, which I recently discovered on the Internet. This too has all the appearances of a clumsy fabrication.
How might we expect JFK to have reacted to ideological blackmail in 1960? Quite differently than he would have reacted in 1963, I'd wager.
Again, I wish to be unequivocal on this point: I do NOT believe that JFK was a communist or a Nazi sympathizer or agent.
I do believe that, as his father's promiscuous son, JFK was targeted by intelligence services -- including those of his own country and/or its allies -- long before he first ran for political office.
How could he not have been?
But all of this may be moot if, as I've ventured in a previous "hypothesis" thread, President John Fitzgerald Kennedy was marked for public execution for reasons that transcend superficial political and economic realities.
