View RSS Feed

James Lateer

Hitler, Franco, McCarthy, The Kennedys

Rate this Entry
The more I learn about the history of Europe and the U.S. from 1917 to 1963, the more it looks like it is mostly about the interests and battles of particular religions, both against Communisim and to a lesser degree, against each other.

JFK was caught between two jaws of a vice. The first jaw was the emotion still lingering about the McCarthy Committee crusade and RFK's role. The opposing jaw was the Vietnam War, about which we are learning was (in many respects) a religious crusade. JFK was sandwiched in the middle of those two jaws of political imperatives.

It seems like in the US due to church/state separation, there is a ban on talking about any political influences on the part of religions as such (except Islam, obviously).

But you can't understand (in my opinion) European/American history without going through and sorting out who was of what religion and what they did on its behalf.

I am reading "Hitler's Crusade" by Waddington.

Here is a quote from page 75:

British assistance he [Hitler] would gladly accept; Bolshevik assistance, on the other hand, never. Indeed, such a prospect was ‘about on par with the Roman Catholic Church wanting to militarize its monasteries and assist Buddhism or Mohammedanism’.” That illustrates Hitler's view of the religion issue and Nazism.

It is possible to discuss the role of religions in the JFK assassination (and McCarthyism and Vietnam) without getting into accusations of prejudice or bias? We know that "Holocaust Denial" vs "Holocaust Education" is an horrendous minefield. Just to make clear, I do believe in the Holocaust. But what can people do in discussing these issues without the personal religious sensitivities erupting into irrational "warfare" instead of frank discussion?
Tags: None Add / Edit Tags