73

President John F. Kennedy: His Life and Public Assassination

Edward Curtin
The following article on the life of President John F. Kennedy, and his assassination on this date, November 22, 1963, is the lead piece in the eighth issue of Garrison: The Journal of History and Deep Politics that has just been published: “The Political Assassinations of the 1960s.”
From JFK, RFK, MLK, and Malcolm X, to Hammarskjold and Lumumba, the 1960s were a tragic period when the CIA took over the United States and profoundly changed the course of history, and Garrison is indispensable for understanding that history and its importance for today.  This issue is double-sized (348 pages), a book really.  If you like the following article, please support and purchase Garrison.

*

Despite a treasure trove of new research and information having emerged over the last fifty-eight years, there are many people who still think who killed President John Fitzgerald Kennedy and why are unanswerable questions.

They have drunk what Dr. Martin Schotz has called “the waters of uncertainty” that results “in a state of confusion in which anything can be believed but nothing can be known, nothing of significance that is.”[1]

Then there are others who cling to the Lee Harvey Oswald “lone-nut” explanation proffered by the Warren Commission.

Both these groups tend to agree, however, that whatever the truth, unknowable or allegedly known, it has no contemporary relevance but is old-hat, ancient history, stuff for conspiracy-obsessed people with nothing better to do. The general thinking is that the assassination occurred more than a half-century ago, so let’s move on.

Nothing could be further from the truth, for the assassination of JFK is the foundational event of modern American history, the Pandora’s box from which many decades of tragedy have sprung.

Pressured to Wage War

From the day he was sworn in as President on January 20, 1961, John F. Kennedy was relentlessly pressured by the Pentagon, the Central Intelligence Agency, and by many of his own advisers to wage war – clandestine, conventional, and nuclear.

To understand why and by whom he was assassinated on November 22, 1963, one needs to apprehend this pressure and the reasons why President Kennedy consistently resisted it, as well as the consequences of that resistance.

It is a key to understanding the current state of our world today and why the United States has been waging endless foreign wars and creating a national security surveillance state at home since JFK’s death.

A War Hero Who Was Appalled By War

It is very important to remember that Lieutenant John Kennedy was a genuine Naval war hero in WW II, having risked his life and been badly injured while saving his men in the treacherous waters of the South Pacific after their PT boat was sunk by a Japanese destroyer. His older brother Joe and his brother-in-law Billy Hartington had died in the war, as had some of his boat’s crew members.

As a result, Kennedy was extremely sensitive to the horrors of war, and, when he first ran for Congress in Massachusetts in 1946, he made it explicitly clear that avoiding another war was his number one priority. This commitment remained with him and was intensely strengthened throughout his brief presidency until the day he died, fighting for peace.

Despite much rhetoric to the contrary, this anti-war stance was unusual for a politician, especially during the 1950s and 1960s. Kennedy was a remarkable man, for even though he assumed the presidency as somewhat of a cold warrior vis-à-vis the Soviet Union in particular, his experiences in office rapidly chastened that stance. He very quickly came to see that there were many people surrounding him who relished the thought of war, even nuclear war, and he came to consider them as very dangerous.

A Prescient Perspective

Yet even before he became president, in 1957, then Senator Kennedy gave a speech in the U.S. Senate that sent shock waves throughout Washington, D.C. and around the world.[2]

He came out in support of Algerian independence from France and African liberation generally and against colonial imperialism.

As chair of the Senate’s African Subcommittee in 1959, he urged sympathy for African independence movements as part of American foreign policy. He believed that continued support of colonial policies would only end in more bloodshed because the voices of independence would not be denied, nor should they be.

That speech caused an international uproar, and in the USA Kennedy was harshly criticized by Eisenhower, Nixon, John Foster Dulles, and even members of the Democratic party, such as Adlai Stevenson and Dean Acheson. But it was applauded in Africa and the Third World.

Yet JFK continued throughout his 1960 presidential campaign raising his voice against colonialism throughout the world and for free and independent African nations. Such views were anathema to the foreign policy establishment, including the CIA and the burgeoning military-industrial complex that President Eisenhower belatedly warned against in his Farewell Address, delivered nine months after approving the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba in March 1960; this juxtaposition revealed the hold the Pentagon and CIA had and has on sitting presidents, as the pressure for war became structurally systemized.

Patrice Lumumba

One of Africa’s anti-colonial and nationalist leaders was the charismatic Congolese Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba. In June, 1960, he had become the first democratically elected leader of the Congo, a country savagely raped and plundered for more than half a century by Belgium’s King Leopold II for himself and multinational mining companies. Kennedy’s support for African independence was well-known and especially feared by the CIA, who, together with Brussels, considered Lumumba, and Kennedy for supporting him, as threats to their interests in the region.

So, three days before JFK’s inauguration, together with the Belgian government, the CIA had Lumumba brutally assassinated after torturing and beating him. According to Robert Johnson, a note taker at a National Security Council meeting in August 1960, Lumumba’s assassination had been approved by President Eisenhower when he gave Allen Dulles, the Director of the CIA, the approval to “eliminate” Lumumba. Johnson disclosed that in a 1975 interview that was discovered in 2000.[3]

On January 26, 1961, when Dulles briefed the new president on the Congo, he did not tell JFK that they already had Lumumba assassinated nine days before. This was meant to keep Kennedy on tenterhooks to teach him a lesson. On February 13, 1961, Kennedy received a phone call from his UN ambassador Adlai Stevenson informing him of Lumumba’s death. There is a photograph by White House photographer Jacques Lowe of the horror-stricken president sitting in the oval office answering that call that is harrowing to view:

It was an unmistakable portent of things to come, a warning for the president.

Dag Hammarskjöld, Indonesia, and Sukarno

One of Kennedy’s crucial allies in his efforts to support third-world independence was United Nations’ Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjöld. Hammarskjöld had been deeply involved in peacekeeping in the Congo as well as efforts to resolve disputes in Indonesia, both important countries central to JFK’s concerns.

Hammarskjöld was killed on September 18, 1961 while on a peacekeeping mission to the Congo. Substantial evidence exists that he was assassinated and that the CIA and Allen Dulles were involved. Kennedy was devastated to lose such an important ally.[4]

Kennedy’s strategy involved befriending Indonesia as a Cold War ally as a crucial aspect of his Southeast Asian policy of dealing with Laos and Vietnam and finding peaceful resolutions to other smoldering Cold War conflicts. Hammarskjöld was also central to these efforts.

The CIA, led by Dulles, strongly opposed Kennedy’s strategy in Indonesia. In fact, Dulles and the CIA had been involved in treacherous maneuverings in resource rich Indonesia for decades. President Kennedy supported the Indonesian President Sukarno, while Dulles opposed him since he stood for Indonesian independence.

Just two days before Kennedy was killed on November 22, 1963, he had accepted an invitation from Indonesian President Sukarno to visit that country the following spring.

The aim of the visit was to end the conflict (Konfrontasi) between Indonesia and Malaysia and to continue Kennedy’s efforts to support post-colonial Indonesia with non-military economic and development aid. His goal was to end conflict throughout Southeast Asia and assist the growth of democracy in newly liberated post-colonial countries worldwide.

Of course, JFK never made it to Indonesia in 1964, and his peaceful strategy to bring Indonesia to America’s side and to ease tensions in the Cold War was never realized, thanks to Allen Dulles and the CIA.  And, Kennedy’s proposed withdrawal of American military advisers from Vietnam, which, in part, was premised on success in Indonesia, was quickly reversed by Lyndon Johnson after JFK’s murder and within a short time hundreds of thousand American combat troops were sent to Vietnam.

In Indonesia, Sukarno would be forced out and replaced by General Suharto, who would rule with an iron fist for the next 30 years. Soon, both countries would experience mass slaughter engineered by Kennedy’s opponents in the CIA and Pentagon.[5]

The Bay of Pigs

In mid-April 1961, less than three months into his presidency, a trap was set for President Kennedy by the CIA and its director, Allen Dulles, who knew of Kennedy’s reluctance to invade Cuba. They assumed the new president would be forced by circumstances at the last minute to send in US Navy and Marine forces to back the invasion that they had planned.

The CIA and generals wanted to oust Fidel Castro, and in pursuit of that goal, trained a force of Cuban exiles to invade Cuba. This had started under President Eisenhower and Vice President Nixon. Kennedy refused to go along with sending in American troops and the invasion was roundly defeated.

The CIA, military, and Cuban exiles bitterly blamed Kennedy.

But it was all a sham. Classified documents uncovered in 2000 revealed that the CIA had discovered that the Soviets had learned the date of the invasion more than a week in advance and had informed Cuban Prime Minister Fidel Castro, but — and here is a startling fact that should make people’s hair stand on end — the CIA never told the President. The CIA knew the invasion was probably doomed before the fact but went ahead with it anyway.

Why? So, they could blame JFK for the failure afterwards.

Kennedy later said to his friends Dave Powell and Ken O’Donnell:

They were sure I’d give in to them and send the go-ahead order to the [Navy’s aircraft carrier] Essex. They couldn’t believe that a new president like me wouldn’t panic and save his own face. Well, they had me figured all wrong.”[6]

This treachery set the stage for events to come. Sensing but not knowing the full extent of the set-up, Kennedy fired CIA Director Allen Dulles (who, as in a bad joke, was later named to the Warren Commission investigating JFK’s assassination) and his assistant, General Charles Cabell (whose brother, Earle Cabell, to make a bad joke absurd, was the mayor of Dallas on the day Kennedy was killed.) It was later discovered that Earle Cabell was a CIA asset.[7]

JFK said he wanted “to splinter the CIA in a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds.” Not sentiments to endear him to a secretive government within a government whose power was growing exponentially.[8]

Kennedy Responds After the Bay of Pigs Treachery

The stage was now set for events to follow as JFK, now even more suspicious of the military-intelligence people around him, and in opposition to nearly all his advisers, consistently opposed the use of force in U.S. foreign policy.

In 1961, despite the Joint Chiefs’ demand to put combat troops into Laos – advising 140,000 by the end of April – Kennedy bluntly insisted otherwise as he ordered Averell Harriman, his representative at the Geneva Conference, “Did you understand? I want a negotiated settlement in Laos. I don’t want to put troops in.”[9]

The president knew that Laos and Vietnam were linked issues, and since Laos came first on his agenda, he was determined to push for a neutral Laos.

Also in 1961, he refused to accede to the insistence of his top generals to give them permission to use nuclear weapons in a dispute with the Soviet Union over Berlin and Southeast Asia. Walking out of a meeting with his top military advisors, Kennedy threw his hands in the air and said, “These people are crazy.”[10]

In March 1962, the CIA, in the person of legendary operative, Edward Lansdale, and with the approval of every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, presented the president with a pretext for a US invasion of Cuba. Code-named Operation Northwoodsthe false-flag plan called for innocent people to be shot in the US, boats carrying Cuban refugees to be sunk and a terrorism campaign to be launched in Miami, Washington DC, and other places, all to be blamed on the Castro government so that the public would be outraged and call for an invasion of Cuba.[11]

Kennedy was appalled and rejected this pressure to manipulate him into agreeing to terrorist attacks on Americans that could later be used against him. He already knew that his life was in danger and that the CIA and military were tightening a noose around his neck. But he refused to yield.

As early as June 26, 1961, in a White House meeting with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev’s spokesperson, Mikhail Kharlamov, and Khrushchev’s son-in-law, Alexei Adzhubei, when asked by Kharlamov why he wasn’t moving faster to advance relations between the two countries, JFK said “You don’t understand this country. If I move too fast on US-Soviet relations, I’ll either be thrown into an insane asylum, or be killed.”[12]

JFK refused to bomb and invade Cuba as the military wished during the Cuban missile crisis in October 1962. The Soviets had placed offensive nuclear missiles and more than 30,000 support troops in Cuba to prevent another US-led invasion. American aerial photography had detected the missiles.

This was understandably unacceptable to the US government. While being urged by the Joint Chiefs and his trusted advisors to order a preemptive nuclear strike on Cuba, JFK knew that a diplomatic solution was the only way out as he wouldn’t accept the death of hundreds of millions of people that would likely follow a series of nuclear exchanges with the Soviet Union.

Only his brother, Robert, and Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara stood with him in opposing the use of nuclear weapons.

Daniel Ellsberg, a former Pentagon and Rand Corporation analyst, reported a coup atmosphere in the Pentagon as Kennedy chose to settle rather than attack.[13] In the end, after thirteen incredibly tense days of brinksmanship, Kennedy and Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev miraculously found a way to resolve the crisis and prevent the use of those weapons.

Afterwards, JFK told his friend John Kenneth Galbraith that “I never had the slightest intention of doing so.”[14]

The Fateful Year 1963

In June, 1963, JFK gave an historic speech at American University in which he called for the total abolishment of nuclear weapons, the end of the Cold War and the “Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war,” and movement toward “general and complete disarmament.”[15]

A few months later he signed a Limited Test Ban Treaty with Nikita Khrushchev.[16]

In October 1963 he signed National Security Action Memorandum 263 calling for the withdrawal of 1,000 U. S. military troops from Vietnam by the end of the year and complete withdrawal by the end of 1965.[17]

All this he did while secretly engaging in negotiations with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev via Saturday Evening Post editor and anti-nuclear weapon advocate, Norman Cousins, Soviet agent Georgi Bolshakov,[18] and Pope John XXIII,[19] as well as  with Cuba’s Prime Minister Fidel Castro through various intermediaries, one of whom was French Journalist Jean Daniel. Of course, secret was not secret when the CIA was involved.

Kennedy, deeply disturbed by the near nuclear catastrophe of the Cuban missile crisis, was determined to open back channel communications to make sure such a near miss never happened again. He knew fault lay on both sides, and that one slipup or miscommunication could initiate a nuclear holocaust.  He was determined, therefore, to try to open lines of communications with his enemies.

Jean Daniel was going to Cuba to interview Fidel Castro, but before he did he interviewed Kennedy on October 24, 1963.

Kennedy, knowing Daniel would tell Castro what he said, asked Daniel if Castro realizes that “through his fault the world was on the verge of nuclear war in October 1962….or even if he cares about it.”  But he also added, to soften the message:

“I approved the proclamation Fidel Castro made in the Sierra Maestra, when he justifiably called for justice and especially yearned to rid Cuba of corruption. I will go even further: to some extent it is as though Batista was the incarnation of a number of sins on the part of the United States. Now we will have to pay for those sins. In the matter of the Batista regime, I am in agreement with the first Cuban revolutionaries. That is perfectly clear.”[20]

Such sentiments were anathema, shall we say treasonous, to the CIA and top Pentagon generals. These clear refusals to go to war with Cuba, to emphasize peace and negotiated solutions to conflicts rather than war, to order the withdrawal of all military personnel from Vietnam, to call for an end to the Cold War, and his willingness to engage in private, back-channel communications with Cold War enemies marked Kennedy as an enemy of the national security state. They were on a collision course.

The Assassination on November 22, 1963

After going through the Bay of Pigs, Cuban Missile Crisis and many other military cliffhangers, Kennedy underwent a deep metanoia, a spiritual transformation, from Cold Warrior to peacemaker.

He came to regard the generals who advised him as devaluing human life and hell-bent on launching nuclear wars. And he was well aware that his growing resistance to war had put him on a dangerous collision course with those generals and the CIA. On numerous occasions, he spoke of the possibility of a military coup d’état against him.

The night before his trip to Dallas, he told his wife, “But, Jackie, if somebody wants to shoot me from a window with a rifle, nobody can stop it, so why worry about it.”[21]

And we know that nobody did try to stop it because they had planned his execution from multiple locations to assure its success.

Who Killed Him?

If the only things you read, watched, or listened to since 1963 were the mainstream corporate media (MSM), you would be convinced that the official explanation for JFK’s assassination, the Warren Commission, was correct in essentials.

You would be wrong, because those corporate media have for all these years served as mouthpieces for the government, most notably the CIA that infiltrated and controlled them long ago under a secret program called Operation Mockingbird.[22]

In 1977, celebrated Watergate journalist, Carl Bernstein, published a 25,000-word cover story for Rolling Stone, “The CIA and the Media,” in which he published the names of many journalists and media, such as The New York TimesCBS, Time, Newsweek, etc., who worked hand in glove with the CIA for decades. Ironically, or as part of “a limited hangout” (spy talk for admitting some truths while concealing deeper ones), this article can be found at the CIA’s own website.

Total control of information requires media complicity, and with the JFK assassination, and in all matters they consider important, the CIA and the MSM are unified.[23] Such control extends to literature, arts, and popular culture as well as news.

Frances Stonor Saunders comprehensively documents this in her 1999 book, The Cultural Cold War: The CIA And The World Of Arts And Letters,[24] and Joel Whitney followed this up in 2016 with Finks: How the CIA Tricked the World’s Best Writerswith particular emphasis on the complicity of the CIA and the famous literary journal The Paris Review.

Such revelations are retrospective, of course, but only the most naïve would conclude such operations are a thing of the past.

The Warren Commission claimed that the president was shot by an ex-Marine named Lee Harvey Oswald, firing three bullets from the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository as Kennedy’s car was already two hundred and fifty feet past and driving away from him.

But this is patently false for many reasons, including the bizarre claim that one of these bullets, later termed “the magic bullet,” passed through Kennedy’s body and zigzagged up and down, left and right, striking Texas Governor John Connolly who was sitting in the front seat and causing seven wounds in all, only to be found later in pristine condition on a stretcher in Parkland Hospital.[25]

And, any lone assassin looking out the 6th floor window would have taken the perfect shot as the limousine approached within forty feet of the TSBD on Houston St.

The absurdity of the government’s claim, a ballistic fairy tale, was the key to its assertion that Oswald killed Kennedy. It was visually shattered and rendered ridiculous by the famous Zapruder film that clearly shows the president being shot from the front right, and, as the right front of his head explodes, he is violently thrown back and to his left as Jacqueline Kennedy climbs on to the car’s trunk to retrieve a piece of her husband’s skull and brain.

This video evidence is clear and simple proof of a conspiracy.[26]

Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?

But there is another way to examine it.

If Lee Harvey Oswald, the man The Warren Commission said killed JFK, was connected to the intelligence community, the FBI and the CIA, then we can logically conclude that he was not “a lone-nut” assassin or not an assassin at all. There is a wealth of evidence to show how, from the very start, Oswald was moved around the globe by the CIA like a pawn in a game, and when the game was done, the pawn was eliminated in the Dallas police headquarters by Jack Ruby two days later.

James W. Douglass, in JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters, the most important book on the matter, asks this question:

Why was Lee Harvey Oswald so tolerated and supported by the government he betrayed?

This is a key question.

After serving as a U.S. Marine at the CIA’s U-2 spy plane Atsugi Air Force Base in Japan with a Crypto clearance (higher than top secret, a fact suppressed by the Warren Commission) and being trained in the Russian language, Oswald left the Marines and defected to the Soviet Union.[27]

After denouncing the U.S., rejecting his American citizenship, working at a Soviet factory in Minsk, and taking a Russian wife—during which time Gary Powers’ U-2 spy plane was shot down over the Soviet Union—he returned to the US with a loan from the American Embassy in Moscow, only to be met at the dock in Hoboken, New Jersey, by Spas T. Raikin, a prominent anti-Communist with extensive intelligence connections recommended by the State Department.[28]

Oswald passed through immigration with no trouble, was not prosecuted, moved to Fort Worth, Texas where, at the suggestion of the Dallas CIA Domestic Contacts Service chief, he was met and befriended by George de Mohrenschildt, an anti-communist Russian, who was a CIA asset. De Mohrenschildt got him a job four days later at a photography and graphic arts company that worked on top secret maps for the US Army Map Service related to U-2 spy missions over Cuba.

Oswald was then shepherded around the Dallas area by de Mohrenschildt. In 1977, on the day he revealed he had contacted Oswald for the CIA and was to meet with the House Select Committee on Assassinations’ investigator, Gaeton Fonzi, de Mohrenschildt allegedly committed suicide.

Oswald then moved to New Orleans in April, 1963 where he got a job at the Reily Coffee Company owned by CIA-affiliated William Reily. The Reily Coffee Company was located in close vicinity to the FBI, CIA, Secret Service, and Naval Intelligence offices and a stone’s throw from the office of Guy Banister, a former Special Agent in Charge of the FBI’s Chicago Bureau, who worked as a covert action coordinator for the intelligence services, supplying weapons, money, and training to anti-Castro paramilitaries. Oswald then went to work with Banister and the CIA paramilitaries.

From this time up until the assassination, Oswald engaged in all sorts of contradictory activities, one day portraying himself as pro-Castro, the next day as anti-Castro, many of these theatrical performances being directed from Banister’s office.

It was as though Oswald, on the orders of his puppet masters, was enacting multiple and antithetical roles in order to confound anyone intent on deciphering the purposes behind his actions and to set him up as a future “assassin” or “patsy.”

James Douglass persuasively argues that Oswald “seems to have been working with both the CIA and FBI,” as a provocateur for the former and an informant for the latter.

Jim and Elsie Wilcott, who worked at the CIA Tokyo Station from 1960-64, in a 1978 interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, said:

It was common knowledge in the Tokyo CIA station that Oswald worked for the agency.”[29]

When Oswald moved to New Orleans in April, 1963, de Mohrenschildt exited the picture, having asked the CIA for and been indirectly given a $285,000 contract to do a geological survey for Haitian dictator “Papa Doc” Duvalier, which he never did, but for which he was paid.[30]

Ruth and Michael Paine then entered the scene on cue. Ruth had been introduced to Oswald by de Mohrenschildt.

In September, 1963, Ruth Paine drove from her sister’s house in Virginia to New Orleans to pick up Marina Oswald and bring her to Dallas to live with her, where Lee also stayed on weekends. Back in Dallas, Ruth Paine conveniently arranged a job for Lee Harvey Oswald in the Texas Book Depository, where he began work on October 16, 1963.

Ruth, along with Marina Oswald, was the Warren Commission’s critically important witness against Oswald. Allen Dulles, despite his earlier firing by JFK, got appointed to a key position on the Warren Commission.  He questioned the Paines in front of it, studiously avoiding any revealing questions, especially ones that could disclose his personal connections to the Paines.

For Michel Paine’s mother, therefore Ruth’s mother-in-law, Ruth Paine Forbes Young, was a close friend of his old mistress, Mary Bancroft, who worked as a spy with Dulles during WW II. Bancroft and he had been invited guests at Ruth Paine Forbes Young’s private island off Cape Cod.

Ruth and Michael Paine had extensive intelligence connections. Thirty years after the assassination, a document was declassified showing Ruth Paine’s sister Sylvia worked for the CIA. Her father traveled throughout Latin America on an Agency for International Development (notorious for CIA front activities) contract and filed reports that went to the CIA. Her husband Michael’s step-father, Arthur Young, was the inventor of the Bell Helicopter, a major military supplier for the Vietnam War, and Michael’s job there gave him a security clearance.

From late September through November 22nd, various “Oswalds” were later reported to have simultaneously been seen from Mexico City to Dallas. Two Oswalds were arrested in the Texas Theater, the real one taken out the front door and an impostor out the back.

As Douglass says:

There were more Oswalds providing evidence against Lee Harvey Oswald than the Warren Report could use or even explain.[31]

Even J. Edgar Hoover knew that Oswald impostors were used, as he told LBJ concerning Oswald’s alleged visit to the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City. He later called this CIA ploy, “the false story re Oswald’s trip to Mexico…their (CIA’s) double-dealing,” something that he couldn’t forget.[32]

It was apparent to anyone paying close attention that a very intricate and deadly game was being played at high levels in the shadows.

We know Oswald was blamed for the President’s murder. But if one fairly follows the trail of the crime, it becomes blatantly obvious that government forces were at work. Douglass and others have amassed layer upon layer of evidence to show how this had to be so.

Who Had the Power to Withdraw the President’s Security?

To answer this essential question is to finger the conspirators and to expose, in Vincent Salandria’s words, “the false mystery concealing state crimes.”[33]

Neither Oswald, the mafia nor anti-Castro Cubans could have withdrawn most of the security that day.

Sheriff Bill Decker ordered all his deputies:

to take no part whatsoever in the security of that [presidential] motorcade.”[34]

Police Chief Jesse Curry did the same for Dallas police protection for the president in Dealey Plaza. Both “Chief Curry and Sheriff Decker gave their orders withdrawing security from the president in obedience to orders they had themselves received from the Secret Service.”

The Secret Service withdrew the police motorcycle escorts from beside the president’s car where they had been on previous presidential motorcades as well as the day before in Houston and removed agents from the back of the car where they were normally stationed to obstruct gunfire.

The Secret Service admitted there were no Secret Service agents on the ground in Dealey Plaza to protect Kennedy. But we know from extensive witness testimony that, during and after the assassination, there were people in Dealey Plaza impersonating Secret Service agents who stopped policeman and the public from moving through the area on the Grassy Knoll where some of the shots appeared to come from.

The Secret Service approved the fateful, dogleg turn (on a dry run on November 18) where the car, driven by Secret Service agent William Greer, moved at a snail’s pace and came almost to a halt before the final head shot, clear and blatant security violations.

The House Select Committee on Assassinations concluded this, not some conspiracy theorist.[35]

Who could have squelched the testimony of the many doctors and medical personnel who claimed the president had been shot from the front in his neck and head, testimony contradicting the official story?

Who could have prosecuted and imprisoned Abraham Bolden, the first African-American Secret Service agent personally brought on to the White House detail by JFK, who warned that he feared the president was going to be assassinated? (Douglass interviewed Bolden seven times and his evidence on the aborted plot to kill JFK in Chicago on November 2 is a story little known but extraordinary in its implications.)

The list of all the people who turned up dead, the evidence and events manipulated, the inquiry squelched, distorted, and twisted in an ex post facto cover-up clearly point to forces within the government, not rogue actors without institutional support.

The evidence for a conspiracy organized at the deepest levels of the intelligence apparatus is overwhelming. James Douglass presents it in such depth and so logically that only one hardened to the truth would not be deeply moved and affected by his book, JFK and the Unspeakable.

But there is more from him and other researchers who have cut the Gordian knot of this false mystery with a few brief strokes.

Oswald, The Preordained Patsy

Three examples will suffice to show that Lee Harvey Oswald, working as part of a US Intelligence operation, was set up to take the blame for the assassination of President Kennedy, and that when he said in police custody that he was “a patsy,” he was speaking truthfully.

These examples make it clear that Oswald was deceived by his intelligence handlers and had been chosen without his knowledge, long before the murder, to take the blame as a lone, crazed killer.

First, Kennedy was shot at 12:30 PM CT. According to the Warren Report, at 12:45 P.M. a police report was issued for a suspect that perfectly fit Oswald’s description. This was based on the testimony of Howard Brennan, who said he was standing across from the Book Depository and saw a standing white man, about 5’10” and slender, fire a rifle at the president’s car from the sixth-floor window.

This was blatantly false because photographs taken moments after the shooting show the window open only partially at the bottom about fourteen inches, and it would have been impossible for a standing assassin to be seen “resting against the left windowsill,” (the windowsill was a foot from the floor), as Brennan is alleged to have said. He would have therefore had to have been shooting through the glass. The description of the suspect was clearly fabricated in advance to match Oswald’s.

Then between 1:06 and 1:15 PM in the quiet residential Oak Cliff neighborhood of Dallas, Police Officer J.D. Tippit was shot and killed. Supposedly based on Brennan’s description broadcast over police radio, Tippit had stopped a man fitting the description and this man pulled a gun and shot the officer.

Meanwhile, Oswald had returned to his rooming house where his landlady said he left at 1:03 P.M., went outside, and was standing at a northbound bus stop.

The Tippet murder took place nine-tenths of a mile away to the south where a witness, Mrs. Higgins, said she heard a gunshot at 1:06 PM, ran outside, saw Tippit lying in the street and a man running away with a handgun whom she said was not Oswald.

Oswald is reported to have entered the Texas Theater minutes before the Tippit murder. The concession stand operator, Warren Burroughs has said he sold him popcorn at 1:15 P.M., which is the time the Warren Report claims Tippit was killed.

At 1:50 PM, Lee Harvey Oswald was arrested in the Texas Theater and taken out the front door where a crowd and many police cars awaited him, while a few minutes later a second Oswald is secretly taken out the back door of the movie theater. (To read this story of the second Oswald and his movement by the CIA out of Dallas on a military aircraft on the afternoon of November 22, 1963, documented in great detail by James W. Douglass, is an eye-opener.)

The official narrative of Oswald and the Tippit murder begs credulity, but it serves to “show” that Oswald was a killer.[36]

Despite his denials, Oswald, set up for Kennedy’s murder based on a prepackaged description, is arraigned for Tippit’s murder at 7:10 PM. It was not until the next day that he was charged for Kennedy’s.

The Message to Air Force One

Secondly, while Oswald is being questioned about Tippit’s murder in the afternoon hours after his arrest, Air Force One has left Dallas for Washington with the newly sworn-in president Lyndon Johnson and the presidential party.

Back in DC, the White House Situation Room is under the personal and direct control of Kennedy’s National Security Advisor, McGeorge Bundy, a man with close CIA ties who had opposed JFK on many matters, including the Bay of Pigs and Kennedy’s order to withdraw from Vietnam.[37]

As reported by Theodore White, in The Making of the President 1964, Johnson and the others were informed by the Bundy controlled Situation Room that there was no conspiracy, learned of the identity of Oswald and his arrest …”[38]

Vincent Salandria, one of the earliest and most astute critics of the Warren Commission, put it this way in his book, False Mystery[39]:

This [announcement from the Situation Room to Air Force One in flight back to Washington, D.C] was the very first announcement of Oswald as the lone assassin. In Dallas, Oswald was not even charged with assassinating the President until 1:30 AM the next morning.

The plane landed at 5:59 PM on the 22nd. At that time the District Attorney of Dallas, Henry Wade, was stating that “preliminary reports indicated more than one person was involved in the shooting…the electric chair is too good for the killers.”

Can there be any doubt that for any government taken by surprise by the assassination — and legitimately seeking the truth concerning it — less than six hours after the time of the assassination was too soon to know there was no conspiracy? This announcement was the first which designated Oswald as the lone assassin…

I propose the thesis that McGeorge Bundy, when that announcement was issued from his Situation Room, had reason to know that the true meaning of such a message when conveyed to the Presidential party on Air Force One [and to a separate plane with the entire cabinet that had turned around and was headed back over the Pacific Ocean] was not the ostensible message which was being communicated.

Rather, I submit that Bundy…was really conveying to the Presidential party the thought that Oswald was being designated the lone assassin before any evidence against him was ascertainable. As a central coordinator of intelligence services, Bundy in transmitting such a message through the Situation Room was really telling the Presidential party that an unholy marriage had taken place between the US Governmental intelligence services and the lone-assassin doctrine.

Was he not telling the Presidential party peremptorily, ‘Now, hear this! Oswald is the assassin, the sole assassin. Evidence is not available yet. Evidence will be obtained, or in lieu thereof evidence will be created. This is a crucial matter of state that cannot await evidence. The new rulers have spoken. You, there, Mr. New President, and therefore dispatchable stuff, and you the underlings of a deposed President, heed the message well.’

Was not Bundy’s Situation Room serving an Orwellian double-think function?[40]

Oswald’s Prepackaged Life Story

Finally, Air Force Colonel Fletcher Prouty adds a third example of the CIA conspiracy for those who need more evidence that the government has lied from the start about the assassination.

Prouty was Chief of Special Operations in the Pentagon before and during the Kennedy years. He was the liaison between the Joint Chiefs and the CIA, working closely with Director Allen Dulles and others in supporting the clandestine operations of the CIA under military cover.

He had been sent out of the country to the South Pole by the aforementioned CIA operative Edward Lansdale (Operation Northwoods) before the Kennedy assassination and was returning on November 22, 1963.

On a stopover in Christchurch, New Zealand, he heard a radio report that the president had been killed but knew no details. He was having breakfast with a U.S Congressman at 7:30 AM on November 23, New Zealand time. A short time later, at approximately 4:30 PM Dallas time, November 22, he bought the Christchurch Star 23 November 1963 newspaper and read it together with the Congressman.

The newspaper reports from the scene said that Kennedy had been killed by bursts of automatic weapons fire, not a single shot rifle, firing three separate shots in 6.8 seconds, as was later claimed for Oswald.

But the thing that really startled him was that at a time when Oswald had just been arrested and had not even been charged for the murder of Officer Tippit, there was elaborate background information on Oswald, his time in Russia, his association with Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New Orleans, etc.

It’s almost like a book written five years later..Furthermore, there’s a picture of Oswald, well-dressed in a business suit, whereas, when he was picked up on the streets of Dallas after the President’s death, he had on some t-shirt or something…Who had written that scenario?  Who wrote that script?

…So much news was already written ahead of time of the murder to say that Oswald killed the President and that he did it with three shots…Somebody had decided Oswald was going to be the patsy…Where did they get it, before the police had charged him with the crime?  Not so much ‘where,’ as ‘why’ Oswald?[41]

Prouty, an experienced military man working for the CIA in the Pentagon, accused the military-intelligence “High Cabal” of killing President Kennedy in an elaborate and sophisticated plot and blaming it on Oswald, whom they had begun setting up years in advance.

The evidence for a government plot to plan, assassinate, cover-up, and choose a patsy in the murder of President John Kennedy is overwhelming.[42]

Five years after JFK’s assassination, we would learn, to our chagrin and his glory, that the president’s younger brother, Senator Robert F. Kennedy, equally brave and unintimidated, would take a bullet to the back of his head in 1968 as he was on his way to the presidency and the pursuit of his brother’s killers. The same cowards struck again.

Their successors still run the country and must be stopped.

Epilogue by James W. Douglass

John F. Kennedy was raised from the death of wealth, power, and privilege. The son of a millionaire ambassador, he was born, raised, and educated to rule the system. When he was elected President, Kennedy’s heritage of power corresponded to his position as head of the greatest national security state in history. But Kennedy, like Lazarus, was raised from the death of that system. In spite of all odds, he became a peacemaker and, thus, a traitor to the system…

Why? What raised Kennedy from the dead? Why did John Kennedy choose life in the midst of death and by continuing to choose life thus condemn himself to death? I have puzzled over that question while studying the various biographies of Kennedy.

May I suggest one source of grace for his resurrection as a peacemaker?

In reading his story, one is struck by his devotion to his children. There is no mistaking the depth of love he had for Caroline and John, and the overwhelming pain he and Jacqueline experienced at the death of their son Patrick. Robert Kennedy in his book Thirteen Days has described how his brother saw the Cuban Missile Crisis in terms of the future of his children and all children.

I believe John Kennedy was at least partially raised from the dead of the national security state by the life of his children. The heroic peacemaking of his final months, with his acceptance of its likely cost in his own death, was, I suspect, partly a result of the universal life he saw in and through them.

I think he believed profoundly the words that he gave in his American University address as his foundation for rejecting the Cold War:

Our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children’s future. And we are all mortal.”[43]

Edward Curtin is an independent writer whose work has appeared widely over many years. His website is edwardcurtin.com and his new book is Seeking Truth in a Country of Lies.
References:-[1] History Will Not Absolve Us: Orwellian Control, Public Denial, and the Murder of President Kennedy, E. Martin Schotz, Kurtz, Ulmer, & DeLucia Book Publishers, 1996.

[2] JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died & Why It MattersJames W. Douglass, Orbis Books, 2008[1][2], p. 8 & p.212. Destiny BetrayedJames DiEugenio2nd Edition, Skyhorse Publishing, 2012, pp. 17-33.

[3] The Devil’s Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA and the Rise of America’s Secret GovernmentDavid Talbot, Harper Collins, 2015, pp. 375389MORI DocID: 1451843 p. 464, p. 473 of “The CIA’s Family Jewels,” 16 May 1973, The National Security Archives.

[4] Investigation into the condition and circumstances resulting in the tragic death of Dag Hammarskjold and of members of the party accompanying him (United Nations General Assembly document,) Judge Mohamed Chande Othman, September 5, 2017, p. 49 and 50, Dag Hammarskjöld Plane Crash Recent Developments, UN Association, Westminster Branch UK.

[5] Edward Curtin interviews Greg Poulgrain on The Incubus of Intervention: Conflicting Indonesian Strategies of John F. Kennedy and Allen DullesGlobal Research, July 22, 2016. Chapter 2 – JFK, Dulles and Hammarskjöld of The Incubus of Intervention. Greg Poulgrain, JFK vs Allen Dulles: Battleground Indonesia, Simon & Schuster, 2020.

[6] Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., American ValuesHarper Collins, 2018, p. 117.

<[7] Dallas Mayor During JFK Assassination Was CIA AssetWho.What.Why, August 2, 2017.

[8] Peter Kornbluh confirmed this in a phone conversation with the author in May 2000. See The ULTRASENSITIVE Bay of PigsNewly Released Portions of Taylor Commission Report Provide Critical New Details on Operation Zapata, National Security Archive Briefing Book No. 29, May 3, 2000.

[9] Averell Harriman interviewed in Charles Stevenson, The End Of Nowhere; American Policy Toward Laos Since 1954 , 1972, p. 154.

[10] Richard Reeves, President Kennedy: Profile of Power, Simon & Schuster, 1994, p. 222.

[11] Pentagon Proposed Pretexts for Cuba Invasion in 1962, FOIA documents at National Security Archive.

[12] Pierre Salinger, P.S.: A Memoir, St. Martin’s Press, 1995, p. 253.

[13] Talbot, op. cit., p. 453.

[14] John Kenneth Galbraith, A Life in Our Times, Houghton Mifflin, 1981, p. 388.

[15] American University Commencement Address, President Kennedy, June 10, 1963.

[16] President Kennedy Radio and TV Address to the American People on the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, July 26, 1963. Treaty Banning Nuclear Weapon Tests in the Atmosphere, in Outer Space, and Under Water, signed at Moscow August 5, 1963, entered into force October 10, 1963.

[17] See James K. Galbraith, “Exit Strategy,” Boston Review, Sept 1, 2003

[18] Pierre Salinger, With Kennedy, Doubleday & Co., 1966, p.198.

[19] See Norman Cousins, The Improbable Triumvirate: John F. Kennedy, Pope John, Nikita Khrushchev – An Asterisk to the History of a Hopeful Year, 1962-1963, W.W. Norton & Co., 1972.

[20] Jean Daniel, “Unofficial Envoy – An Historic Report from Two Capitals,” The New Republic, December 14, 1963.

[21] Kenneth P. O’Donnell and David F. Powers, “Johnny, We Hardly Knew Ye;” Memories of John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Little Brown, 1972, p.25.

[22] See Operation Mockingbird, the only FOIA-released-by-CIA documents at The Black Vault. Carl Bernstein, “THE CIA AND THE MEDIA – How Americas Most Powerful News Media Worked Hand in Glove with the Central Intelligence Agency and Why the Church Committee Covered It Up.” Rolling Stone, October 20, 1977.

[23] James F. Tracy, “The CIA and the Media: 50 Facts the World Needs to Know,” Global Research/ratical.org, 2018.

[24] Frances Stonor Saunders, The Cultural Cold War: The CIA And The World Of Arts And Letters, New Press. 1999. See Also: James Petras, “The CIA and the Cultural Cold War Revisited,” Monthly Review, November 1999.

[25] See Vincent J. Salandria, “The Warren Report?“ Liberation, March 1965.

[26] Zapruder Film in slow motion.

[27] Gerald D. McKnight, Breach of Trust: How the Warren Commission Failed the Nation and Why, Univ. Of Kansas Press, 2005, review by Jim DiEugenio.

[28] Douglass, op. cit., p. 46.

[29] See James and Elsie Wilcott: CIA Profile in Courage, excerpt from JFK and the Unspeakable, pp. 144-148, 421-422.

[30] Douglass, op. cit., p. 47-48.

[31] See Oswald’s Doubles: How Multiple Lookalikes Were Used to Craft One Lone Scapegoat, excerpt from JFK and the Unspeakable, pp. 286-303, 350-355, 464-470, 481-483.

[32] Douglass, op. cit., p. 81.

[33] Vincent Salandria, The JFK Assassination: A False Mystery Concealing State Crimes, presentation at the Coalition on Political Assassinations, November 20, 1998.

[34] Dallas Deputy Sheriff Roger Dean Craig, When They Kill A President, 1971.

[35] Douglass, op. cit., pp. 270-277 and endnote 75 of James Douglass’ 2009 COPA Keynote Address. Secret Service Final Survey Report for the November 21, 1963, visit by President Kennedy to Houston, cited in Appendix to Hearings before the HSCA, vol. 11p.529.

[36] Douglass, op. cit., pp. 287-304. DiEugenio, op. cit., pp. 391-2.

[37] Talbot, op.cit., pp. 407-8.  &  NSAM 263 (document 194), Foreign Relations of the United States, Vietnam v. IV, Aug-Dec’63.

[38] Theodore White, The Making of the President, 1964, Atheneum, 1965, p. 33. See also, , Let Us Begin Anew: An Oral History of the Kennedy Presidency, Gerald S. Strober, Debra Strober, Perennial, 1993, pp. 450-451.

[39] False MysteryEssays on the JFK Assassination by Vincent Salandriarat haus reality press, 2017

[40] Bundy Continued to Shape Hawkish Policies, in Vincent J. Salandria, “The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy: A Model of Explanation,” Computers and Automation, December 1971, pp. 32-40.

[41] David T. Ratcliffe, Understanding Special Operations: 1989 Interview with L. Fletcher Proutyrat haus reality press, 1999, pp. 214-215.

[42] See The President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection at The National Archives.

[43] James Douglass, “The Assassinations of Martin Luther King and John F. Kennedy in the Light of the Fourth Gospel,” Sewanee Theological Review, 1998

can you spare $1.00 a month to support independent media

Unlike the Guardian we are NOT funded by Bill & Melinda Gates, or any other NGO or government. So a few coins in our jar to help us keep going are always appreciated.

Our Bitcoin JTR code is: 1JR1whUa3G24wXpDyqMKpieckMGGW2u2VX

5 13 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
73 Comments
newest
oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Ged Hurst
Ged Hurst
Nov 24, 2021 8:07 PM

I have read lots of books of the Kennedy assasination: This is the best overall summary I have read yet: I must read the Douglass book again:

Emanuel Garcia
Emanuel Garcia
Nov 24, 2021 8:07 PM

I have followed Ed’s writings for years and this is a veritable masterpiece of informed elucidation, a magnificent summary of the grand and cruel deception foisted upon us by the perpetrators of a crime that has led to America’s rotting decline. I urge all to share this as widely as possible.

Paul Vonharnish
Paul Vonharnish
Nov 24, 2021 4:39 PM

An excellent synopsis of John Kennedy’s murder… Thank you Edward Curtin.

All of this has been well documented for at least 3 decades. No arrests, no indictments, and no executions for CIA treason against the United States…

It’s obvious from reader comments, that there is little interest in stopping more blatant political executions and criminal assaults on human liberty… Viva la corporate agency

Rose
Rose
Nov 24, 2021 2:25 PM

The next level in understanding false flag events is understanding the staging of fake events.

There is evidence political players are swapped out and ‘reincarnate’ in other roles

Something worth objective review and investigation

How can a few families maintain control of the political leadership positions?

Understanding the core mechanisms of control are essential. And, the layers of the onion go deep

niko
niko
Nov 23, 2021 9:23 PM

Just to make sure the propaganda is repackaged to keep up with the times, Yahoos’ News has featured stories of QAnon followers gathered in Dallas for the AssassiNation anniversary, more proof positive it’s all just conspiracy theory. Meanwhile, declassification of (redacted) government controlled documents related to the fateful event have been postponed, again, due to Covid-19(84).

Victor G.
Victor G.
Nov 23, 2021 8:02 PM

Lots of good info. All convincing. But, geese, it seems to me a key element was not even touched on.
Let me see if I can remember, ah … ahhh, it has something to due with the development of nuclear weapons in the, the, the Middle East that could be deployed independently and about which JFK had pronounced his firm, unequivocal disapproval … yeah but I’m starting to get lost in the fog. I think it might be related somehow to that Ruby fellow.
Nah, I must be delirious …

Sam - Admin2
Admin
Sam - Admin2
Nov 24, 2021 2:55 AM
Reply to  Victor G.

So cryptic, it hurts my brain. And what have geese got to do with it?

Victor G.
Victor G.
Nov 24, 2021 9:33 AM
Reply to  Sam - Admin2

Jeeze,Sam! Last thing I want to do is hurt your brain.
Give me a little time to do some more research and I’ll be less cryptic.
I don’t want to play with fire without getting my protective gear on … don’t want to start singing till I know my song well

excommunicated
excommunicated
Nov 24, 2021 10:02 AM
Reply to  Victor G.

Well done that was another valid point which many have missed out !(conveniently)

New Name
New Name
Nov 24, 2021 10:02 PM
Reply to  Victor G.

Presumably you have read MC Piper’s Final Judgement.

Derek
Derek
Nov 24, 2021 11:39 AM
Reply to  Sam - Admin2

Let me spell it out for you…….
John and Robert were brothers, their assassinations have at least two things in common: Lyndon Johnson and Israel.

steadydirt
steadydirt
Nov 27, 2021 2:25 PM
Reply to  Victor G.

enemies everywhere in the swamp;

JFK’s Executive Order 11110 Abolishing the Federal Reserve
https://truth11.com/2020/06/03/jfks-executive-order-11110-abolishing-the-federal-reserve/

Edwige
Edwige
Nov 23, 2021 6:56 PM

“In 1977, celebrated Watergate journalist, Carl Bernstein, published a 25,000-word cover story for Rolling Stone, “The CIA and the Media'”

Which was indeed a limited hangout because Bernstein excused his own newspaper ‘The Washington Post’ from CIA control which is obvious nonsense.

New Name
New Name
Nov 24, 2021 10:04 PM
Reply to  Edwige

Watergate was arranged to get Nixon out of power.

excommunicated
excommunicated
Nov 23, 2021 5:33 PM

Beast of a article Mr Curtis

The occult version of this makes sense as well.

GR-Watch
GR-Watch
Nov 23, 2021 3:43 PM

” .. dozen .. snipers opened fire on the [French] president’s car, which managed to escape the ambush despite all four tires being shot out”

a quite informative article by Cynthia Chung on the Saker website.

amazing events in Congo, France, Indonesia, Laos. all leading of course to the pentagon, the white house and Dallas:

http://thesaker.is/in-memory-of-jfk-the-first-u-s-president-to-be-declared-a-terrorist-and-threat-to-national-security/

quite informative.

Jim McDonagh
Jim McDonagh
Nov 23, 2021 6:32 PM
Reply to  GR-Watch

Thumbs up and thanks for the link to the source article by Ms Chung on a site where one can still comment

New Name
New Name
Nov 24, 2021 10:05 PM
Reply to  GR-Watch

Permindex was involved in both the JFK assassination and the attempt on de Gaulle.

Matt Smyth
Matt Smyth
Nov 23, 2021 3:12 PM

A great paper, needless to say. I have to confess the epilogue by James Douglas brought tears to my eyes…

lit-nat
lit-nat
Nov 23, 2021 2:01 PM

I just tumbled to an insight re: a pop culture relic relevant to this discussion. Maybe this is old news to some of you.

The TV show Dallas: I never watched the first run because I was a small child when it aired. But isn’t it pure concocted NWO obfuscation of the Kennedy assassination? First of all, the simple fact that they roll out a TV show by that name to reframe perception of the political murder venue seems significant. And then the manufactured cliffhanger about who shot the main character, who is an underhanded and sinister manipulator. JR = John + Robert. The masses’ skepticism about CIA etc. involvement in JFK’s killing is redirected into gossip about a soap opera. WT literal F maaan!

OK, gotta go deliver the butter. Peace,

Tom

New Name
New Name
Nov 25, 2021 2:46 AM
Reply to  lit-nat

Good points. I haven’t watched the soap opera so I don’t have much to go on.

GR-Watch
GR-Watch
Nov 23, 2021 1:52 PM

“As a result, [whoever] was extremely sensitive to the horrors of war”

this is very unamerican, i’d say!

Odysseus
Odysseus
Nov 23, 2021 11:39 AM

The method and means of Kennedy’s assassination tells us all about the deep motive of the killers.

It would have been relatively easy for a “lone nut” to murder the President at close quarters (especially given the corruption in the secret service) away from media coverage.
Clearly what was required was a gory televised ambush and a deliberately farcical investigation, to spread the message that the plotters were (and are) totally in control and they didn’t care who knew it. Holes in the story? “What are you gonna do about it?”

Lysias
Lysias
Nov 23, 2021 4:22 PM
Reply to  Odysseus

Given JFK’s bad health and all the medicines he was taking, it would have been very easy to poison him and to portray his death as natural.

Johnny
Johnny
Nov 23, 2021 10:50 AM

History proves, beyond doubt, that men or women of wisdom and compassion will NEVER be allowed to occupy positions of high office.
Occasionally one or two slip past the ‘sentinels’
They are dealt with

Loverat 8
Loverat 8
Nov 23, 2021 10:05 AM

Very educational and easy to read. I hadn’t gone much into JFK but this article confirmed my understanding of the man and the traitors undermining him then, and traitors in power now. Perhaps we are seeing a realisation and joining up the dots. JFK to 9/11 and now Covid. I sense the traitors have overplayed their hand this time.

les online
les online
Nov 23, 2021 10:02 AM

CIA guy in NZ, sipping a coffee reading Oswell’s Dirt File published in NZ “news”paper.
Getting Dirt Files propagated by the “news” media – before The Facts are available _ is very important for creating First Impressions.
First Impressions are important as they provide the prism through which the later Revealed Facts
are filtered…The more shocking those Dirt File details are the more indelible their inscription in the memory…
Keep an eye out for the Dirt File based stories in the “news” media next time They take some Baddie out…

New Name
New Name
Nov 25, 2021 2:50 AM
Reply to  les online

I think I have been to the restaurant overlooking Mt Cook (Aoraki) where Fletcher Prouty heard the announcement about the assassination.

Edwige
Edwige
Nov 23, 2021 9:45 AM

The whole thing is buried under such levels of disinfo very little can be said about it with any certainty (although the Warren Commission account is manifest garbage).

One line of argument that seems untenable is the idea Kennedy was killed to change this or that policy (or collection of policies). The CIA had enough – like an affair with a Soviet agent – to remove Kennedy peacefully through impeachment or at the very least to paralyse his presidency. Whatever transpired in Dealey Plaza – and I would see it as a ritual – has to have been very much the point.

A few lesser known details that may or may not be part of the jigsaw:
1) Marina Oswald was the daighter of a KFB officer and her previous boyfriend had also been a US defector. She met him ten days before they were married. Rather than some whirlwind romance she only met him twice in that period and both times he was in hospital. She was the only source for the claim Oswald fired at General Edwin Walker when the witnesses to the incident said there was more than one shooter, none of whose descriptions matched Oswald.
2) The Texas School Book Depositary was owned by a cousin of Admiral Byrd of Operation High Jump fame.
3) The witnesses in the Tippit shooting split almost exactly 50-50 that it was one shooter or two. That has to have been manufactured, however much they try to psy-op the idea about the unreliability of eyewitnesses. The nearest eyewitness claimed the dying Tippit talked to her yet the coroner said Tippit was shot through the heart and would have been dead before he hit the ground.
4) Jack Ruby’s lawyer was a tort lawyer and had never participated in a criminal trial.
5) George de Mohrenschildt was a close family friend of the Bouviers. Jackie Kennedy’s first job had been as a secretary in the CIA. How the operation could have been pulled off without too much danger of hitting her, either in the official version or the official conspiracy version, remains one of the biggest puzzles. Killing her would have been a PR disaster for the assassins.
6) The official explanation of ‘umbrella man’ is obvious nonsense. It was clearly a signal – although of what and to whom remains a matter of speculation.
7) Assuming for the moment that Zapruder isn’t faked at least up until that point, what hit Kennedy in the throat and his reaction to it is another very strange element. Obviously it wasn’t a bullet from the rear, the wounds don’t begin to line up and the the spinal column is in the way. The tracheotomy conveniently destroyed the area but it has to have been an entry wound.
8) The Oswalds had this strange period when they went to live briefly in New York. It looks like this was a cover for an identity switch, that a different man was playing Oswald when he returned (possibly someone of Russian descent which would explain how he was able to learn Russian and spoke it with a distinct regional accent).

spinzo
spinzo
Nov 23, 2021 8:00 PM
Reply to  Edwige

The night before his trip to Dallas, he told his wife, “But, Jackie, if somebody wants to shoot me from a window with a rifle, nobody can stop it, so why worry about it.”[21]

Setting the stage?

Researcher
Researcher
Nov 23, 2021 8:45 PM
Reply to  Edwige

There were numerous Oswalds. It was a character, not a person or an agent. Maybe even twins.

And the autopsy was hoaxed. As were the pictures doctored. And it’s obvious what Jackie is really doing when she crawls to the back of the car to retrieve part of the prop.

These assassination hoaxes and faux shootings have tell-tale signs. Firstly, the alleged assassins always have three names. Lee Harvey Oswald. John Wilkes Booth. Secondly there’s too much Gematria involved for it to be possibly real. Thirdly, there are always rabbit holes and disinfo wherever you look. No logical or simple explanations. And lastly, there are never any bodies.

Once one realizes the assassinations and staged terror events are hoaxes everything else makes sense. There was no motive to murder one of their own. JFK started Vietnam. He participated in the Space Race fraud and the Cold War fraud. The Cuban Missile Crisis Hoax.

It’s all just trauma based mind control. Generating fear to gain control. Generate societal and political schisms, gain more control. Divide and conquer equals complete control.

The cryptocracy need people to believe the press and watch tv, which is no more believable than a bad Hollywood movie, and born from the same backers. Joe Kennedy was heavily involved in the monopolization of Hollywood.

The cryptocracy grab more power and authority over the people using the faux assassinations and faux terror events as evidence that anyone who dares challenge authority or the official narrative is crazy and potentially dangerous.

They annihilate anti-authoritarian movements and manipulate public sentiment by regressing them to child-like compliance, in one fell swoop.

They destroy public morale and profiteer from the industries that benefit from the distractions and escapism sought by the media “consumers”. While at the same time, these media “consumers” in their quest to escape the daily bombardment of disinfo and terror narratives, are being fed programmed perceptions and beliefs through Hollywood and the specter of celebrity.

The public takes on various identities and personas as an attempt to fit into a harsh and artificial world of organized chaos, artificial scarcity, coerced conformity, farmed human labor, mass deceptions and debt, and unnecessary iniquity.

The youth are taught that it’s ok to rebel, but only in the most shallow way possible: Clothing. Tattoos. Hair color or cuts. Piercings. Drugs. Alcohol. Promiscuity. Music. Rap. Veganism. Gangs. Etc. All of it, self destructive, superficial behaviors that don’t change the consumerist culture or debt slavery and offer no real challenge to the corrupt authority structures and institutions already in place.

The masses who vote believe in the fraud of the presidency as a seat of power and as the potential for change or reform, and so are eternally waiting for the next faux hero dressed up in red or blue colors, (or green) instead of standing up individually and en masse against the governments, corporations and media to call out these corrupt institutions of power for their obvious deception, fraud, conspiracy and racketeering.

Moneycircus
Moneycircus
Nov 23, 2021 8:56 AM

Time for a little psychological analysis: this Andrew Pierce creature (born Patrick J Connolly).
Wiki claims he is a right wing journalist. That doesn’t explain it. Is he, like Con Coughlin of the Telegraph, a long-time asset of the security services? (BTW, did you know Jimmy Wales of Wikipedia is a Young Global Leader of Klaus Schwab’s World Economic Forum parapolitical vanguard?) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Pierce

Here Andrew Pierce-Patrick Connolly goes full Obersturmbannführer on the unvaxxed (OFF-G RT)
https://twitter.com/i/status/1462805170887303170

Orthus
Orthus
Nov 23, 2021 11:18 AM
Reply to  Moneycircus

Andrew Pierce next sentence: “if you aren’t vaccinated you’re 32,000 more likely to die”

Can’t disagree with that in principle. Chances of dying of alleged Covid if unvaxxed: FA squared. If vaxxed the chance is considerably less because the vaxx will get you first.

BTW, the outlaw Jimmy Wales is involved with the Guardian, he is alleged to have written one of the Wiki pages for its incredibly talented editor.

Mr Y
Mr Y
Nov 23, 2021 6:00 AM

Sorry Curtin, alarm bells are ringing, I can’t buy the “JFK was a good guy” story …

George Mc
George Mc
Nov 23, 2021 7:46 AM
Reply to  Mr Y

That’s not the point. JFK wasn’t doing what was expected of him. So they got rid of his. And the fact they did this and the way they did it hangs over us as one of the most major turning points in the West.

Marianne
Marianne
Nov 23, 2021 1:26 PM
Reply to  Mr Y

Is there no-one you can trust or admire? These kinds of sentiments (not just from yourself) do nothing but promote fear, distrust and a dismal perspective on humanity. Are there no heroes in your world?

lozzer
lozzer
Nov 24, 2021 11:44 AM
Reply to  Mr Y

I agree with you, Mr Y. I don’t think even JFK would recognise himself if he read some parts of Curtin’s canonising article about him.
He was a charismatic easy on the eye man that did some good, but there’s no mention of his impatience with the civil rights movement and the infamous quote to one of his advisors when the freedom rides started, “Can’t you get your goddamned friends off those buses?”
And his backing of the 1963 coup – the so-called Ramadan Revolution -against the pro-Soviet military leader of Iraq. The coup put the Baath Party in power, leading to Saddam Hussein’s decades-long rule.
Had he not been assassinated, he’d be as tainted as the rest of the US presidents.

New Name
New Name
Nov 25, 2021 2:54 AM
Reply to  lozzer

A propaganda post.

Penelope
Penelope
Nov 23, 2021 5:20 AM

I was 19 and had been awake only a few months to the conspiracy of the British Roundtable and the US CFR — the intention to rule the entire world. Educated men had published books on it before I was born, and these were to be found in the Used Bookstores.

I was only a few months into looking at the minutiae of it when the radio said, “Shots rang out, and the motorcade sped on.” I thought it was some crazy Texan firing shots in the air, but a moment later I heard “There was blood on the President’s head.” And I thought, “Please don’t let it have been a Colored man.” (We were still in the midst of racial foment then and there were racists who would have taken advantage.) It was only a few minutes until “President John Fitzgerald Kennedy was pronounced dead at such & such a time at Parkland Memorial Hospital.”

I cried. There were a few bits of reporting that didn’t fit, but I was too shocked to think of conspiracy until they killed Oswald. Then it seemed that EVERYone knew.

I have always thought that we would have to pay for not exposing and punishing those responsible.

The intrepid Dorothy Kilgallen tried. She called in a favor and got in to see the imprisoned Jack Ruby, killer of Oswald. She was a panelist on the What’s My Line? show. It was broadcast live, and she told the moderator, Bennet Cerf that she was going to break the story during the show. He begged her not to, and perhaps betrayed her. A few days later she “suicided” in the midst of her ransacked apartment.

Back in those days I could see the evil that they did, but I couldn’t imagine that they would come so close to ruling the world. There is a Chinese curse, “May you live in interesting times!”

Jax
Jax
Nov 23, 2021 4:45 AM

does no one consider the possibility that he didn’t die that day, that it was all a hoax?

all the world is a stage

Jax
Jax
Nov 23, 2021 4:46 AM
Reply to  Jax

does everyone believe everything they are told by the tell-lie-vision?

New Name
New Name
Nov 23, 2021 5:48 AM
Reply to  Jax

I don’t but your hypothesis displays a profound ignorance of history.

Researcher
Researcher
Nov 23, 2021 6:27 PM
Reply to  New Name

History as told by whom? Howard Zinn? Chomsky? Quigley? Or some other Mason with a PhD at Yale? Like Tim Snyder (the Spider) who pushed the Russiagate hoax 24-7.

“History” isn’t reliable. There’s an entire truth movement populated with revisionist historians because the public is bombarded with lies and hoaxes that are CONTINUOUSLY BEING EXPOSED. Think WMDs. They never had bad intel, they just manufacture narratives that are repeated in the press until people believe the lies. Bioweapons. Nuclear weapons. Pandemics and plagues. The Space Race. The Cold War. The Climate Emergency. All hoaxes. Scams to racketeer, control and scare the population.

If our so-called shared “history” and what’s being taught in schools, read in papers, churches and promoted or allowed published in certain books and tertiary texts has been written by liars, frauds and Masonic factions for hundreds or even thousands of years, then how can we accurately evaluate what’s real in terms of publicized, televized, politicized, domestic and world “events”?

Anyone who believes the official story about anything without bothering to research the validity of it themselves, and at least conceive that it may not be entirely true as promoted, is a potential dupe.

If one can conceive that the assassination or perception of an assassination achieved certain COINTELPRO, Masonic and political objectives simultaneously, then one could, at the very least, explore if the evidence for the assassination is real or if it’s just another Hollywood production, populated with bad actors, playing parts. Not patsies. Not assassins. Not sharpshooters. Not snipers.

Reset the Diaboligarchy
Reset the Diaboligarchy
Nov 23, 2021 6:35 AM
Reply to  Jax

Some kind of hive mind phenomenon, a fuzzily Jungian bubbling up of the murdered king archetype? Sure, why not…

wardropper
wardropper
Nov 23, 2021 7:36 AM
Reply to  Jax

Or maybe he never existed at all…?

I think most of us here consider a great many possibilities at all times…

Antonym
Antonym
Nov 23, 2021 4:18 AM

In the age of Internet big “covert” options agencies are more a liability than an asset for most nations, specially when they run the place over the heads of the politicians like in the US or Pakistan. Internet sooner or later shows up the mistakes, clumsiness, bad character etc. of those who lead big agencies. The MSM or SM fail in their fig leaf functions now. De fund these emperors without cloths.

mgeo
mgeo
Nov 23, 2021 8:47 AM
Reply to  Antonym

The Internet facilitates exposure by way of (a) finding info. and people (b) re-evaluating reports, claims and analyses (c) recursion.

Reset the Diaboligarchy
Reset the Diaboligarchy
Nov 22, 2021 11:52 PM

Ultimately, it was the same Anglo-American “Internationalist”/Globalist forces (i.e. Rockefeller & Friends) behind the Kennedy assassination as are behind this Covid – Great Reset – Agenda 21/2030 coup.

Some excerpts from Donald Gibson’s essential The Kennedy Assassination Cover-Up:

Before the Warren Commission even issued its report, Lord Russell
was forming his British Who Killed Kennedy? Committee and he was
accusing the United States government and/or local right-wingers in
Texas of the assassination. Russell’s associate, Hugh Trevor-Roper,
focused on the Dallas police in his introduction to Mark Lane’s Rush
to Judgment (1966). Since that time, with only a few exceptions,
writers have blamed some part of the U.S. government and/or one or
more of the following: organized crime, Cuban exiles, Conservative
Texans or other right-wingers who don’t live in the Northeast,
unidentified rich guys, stock speculators, and/or the Israeli Mossad.
When the government is blamed, one or more of the following are
accused: the Government, the executive branch, the CIA, elements
within the CIA, the military or elements thereof, the militaryintelligence
complex, Army intelligence, elements of the FBI,
elements of the Secret Service, and/or, by name, J. Edgar Hoover,
LBJ, Nixon, and/or Clint Murchison. Taken quite literally not all of
these accusations can be true. There probably were not enough
people in Dealey Plaza that day to represent all those groups. The
shooters would have been shooting each other.

Reset the Diaboligarchy
Reset the Diaboligarchy
Nov 22, 2021 11:54 PM

Among those who believe there was a conspiracy and who have
focused on non-governmental forces, the favorite suspects are
organized crime, anti-Castro Cubans, and various types of non-
Establishment right-wingers. With one exception, none of these
kinds of people appear in any significant role in the cover-up. The
exception is Jack Ruby. Among the few certain things in the events
surrounding the assassination is that Ruby shot Oswald. Ruby did
have connections to organized crime. The problem is that no one
knows why Ruby killed Oswald and we have no way of knowing what
might have been the ultimate source of any pressure that might have
been applied to Ruby to get him to shoot Oswald.

Reset the Diaboligarchy
Reset the Diaboligarchy
Nov 22, 2021 11:56 PM

Kennedy’s initiatives were significantly at odds with all of those
Establishment preferences. His foreign aid program was supposed
to further economic development and free Third World nations from
the backwardness and inferiority which had been central to colonial
and neo-colonial arrangements. He favored nation-to-nation
agreements and was quite willing to bypass the private banks and
the “free market.” He showed no interest in aggressively demanding
that recipients adhere to the other conditions that were required by
the international banking community in exchange for loans or aid.

Kennedy showed no interest in supporting IMF policies.
The Establishment’s criticisms of Kennedy’s international policy were
in many ways identical to their attacks on his domestic policy. In both
cases he was condemned for intervening in the private economy
with what the Establishment viewed as an excessive commitment to
economic progress. This Establishment view of Kennedy was stated
in other media and by leaders of the Establishment. In the media the
criticisms of Kennedy were probably nowhere more extensive than in
the Wall Street Journal.

Reset the Diaboligarchy
Reset the Diaboligarchy
Nov 22, 2021 11:57 PM

Leaders are usually killed because some group does not like their
ideas and policies. If the ideas and policies survive and continue to
guide decision making, then the assassination is a pointless and
risky exercise. The ideas and policies must also be “assassinated.”
In order to cover up the assassination, the assassins must control
the investigation. We have seen how this was done. A successful
cover-up also requires that the leader’s actual ideas and policies are
never connected to the assassination. That would lead to the real
assassins. The assassination of the ideas is then also part of the
cover-up.

It follows that the cover-up of an assassination requires control over
the actual investigation, a patsy, and an incorrect image of the dead
leader. As we have seen, mainstream or conservative Establishment
figures gained control over the investigation and created the official
cover story, i.e., the President was killed by a lone nut, one who may
have had communist tendencies. Around the time of the
assassination and later a group of not so conservative Establishment
figures were making their contribution to the cover-up. These
Establishment radicals either attacked Kennedy or they suggested
others patsies, or both. They contributed to the cover-up by distorting
Kennedy’s record and by directing suspicions to people who had
little or nothing to do with the assassination. We will focus on three
such Establishment radicals: Corliss Lamont, Wall Street’s man on
the left, the internationally renowned linguist Noam Chomsky, and
Lord Bertrand Russell, grandson of Prime Minister John Russell,
Duke of Bedford.

Reset the Diaboligarchy
Reset the Diaboligarchy
Nov 22, 2021 11:59 PM

The Institute of Pacific Relations, International House, the
International Trade Mart as well as Permindex and the World
Commerce Corporation were all expressions of the interests of
groups of wealthy people based in New York, Boston, and London.
They wanted an integrated global economy under their control.
Kennedy wanted strong, independent nations cooperating with each
other to advance common purposes. They wanted a passive and
submissive federal government. Kennedy was an activist President
in the tradition of Lincoln and Roosevelt. They wanted the majority of
people to submit to whatever economic and social conditions the
Establishment offered. Kennedy stimulated a hope for a better
future. They thought that much or most of the world’s people should
remain forever poor. Kennedy sought an effective course of action to
stimulate national and global progress. Kennedy, following the
Constitution, thought that the Federal Government was obligated to
promote the “general welfare.” They thought it was supposed to
promote their welfare. Kennedy believed in democracy. They did not.

Reset the Diaboligarchy
Reset the Diaboligarchy
Nov 23, 2021 12:01 AM

JFK acting as President of the United States and John J. McCloy
acting as executive secretary for the Establishment represented two different and conflicting views of government. Kennedy’s view was descendent from Alexander Hamilton and Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall. That view was also expressed in the policies and goals of John Quincey Adams, Abraham Lincoln, and Franklin D. Roosevelt. In a very slightly populist form, it also appeared in the politics of Huey Long.

McCloy, Acheson, Dulles, Rostow, Alsop, and Reston all spoke and acted for a different concept of government. They represented an Eastern Establishment or Anglo-American Establishment view that
has its origins in the political philosophy of John Locke. Locke’s
amalgamation of feudalist and early capitalist values assigns to
government the task of maintaining and defending the privileges of
the dominant propertied interests. In this very wearied tradition,
government is to be generally passive except in its police and
defense functions. Above all else, and at times in conflict with its
police and defense responsibilities, government is assigned the duty of actively protecting those property interests. The disaster of the 1930s had led to a resurrection of some of the traditions and policies of Hamiltonianism and its successors. Kennedy sought to maintain and deepen that trend. McCloy’s masters were heading in a different direction.

Kennedy’s foreign policy and his opposition to the Anglo-American
Establishment’s neo-colonialism were based on his general
commitment to progress and on his sense of justice. He related to
his own Irish ancestry partly in terms of this issue. In January of
1962 President Kennedy said the following to Prime Minister
Jawaharlal Nehru of India:

I grew up in a community where the people were hardly a
generation away from colonial rule. And I can claim the company of many historians in saying that the colonialism to which my
immediate ancestors were subject was more sterile, oppressive and even cruel than that of India.

Kennedy’s opposition to colonialism and all similar policies was part of the public record throughout most of his political career.
His economic policy was derived from his own reasoning and it
appears to be based at least partly on his appreciation of the early
Hamilton Federalists and later like-minded ideas. His sense of
government may well have been reinforced by his understanding of Christianity.

Reset the Diaboligarchy
Reset the Diaboligarchy
Nov 23, 2021 12:09 AM

comment image

Reset the Diaboligarchy
Reset the Diaboligarchy
Nov 23, 2021 1:32 AM

Another excerpt:

Noam Chomsky’s Rethinking Camelot: JFK, the Vietnam War, and US Political Culture (1993) discredits and attacks Kennedy while protecting the private interests that promoted the Vietnam involvement long before Kennedy was President and continued to do so after Kennedy was assassinated. Like Lamont and Russell, Chomsky studiously avoids any mention of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) even though the CFR’s leadership began planning for U.S. intervention in Southeast Asia in the early-1940s. He never refers to high level figures at the CFR who were active promoters of the Vietnam War. Among the leaders of that group were John J. McCloy, Allen Dulles, David Rockefeller, and Henry M. Wriston.

Since they were part of the Kennedy and Johnson administrations, CFR members McGeorge Bundy and Dean Rusk are mentioned, Bundy about ten times. Their affiliations outside of government, including their CFR memberships, are never discussed, leaving the impression that the most important indicator of who they were is their position in Kennedy’s government. Similarly, Averill Harriman,
George Ball, and Michael Forrestal are all mentioned as government officials. Chomsky does not point out that they were all CFR members and, as with Bundy and Rusk, he says nothing about their backgrounds or other private affiliations.
Throughout this book, in a pattern that is virtually identical to
Lamont’s writing on Cuba and Vietnam, Chomsky is totally silent on Wall Street, the Establishment, the upper class, and the CFR.

Vietnam is Kennedy’s war, and then it is LBJ’s and Nixon’s war. In at least three places the war is referred to simply as “Kennedy’s war.” Those who created the policy are “Kennedy planners”, “Kennedy and his circle,” and “JFK and his advisors.” U.S. bombing missions in 1962 are “Kennedy’s aggression” and the U.S. implemented “Kennedy’s brutal strategic hamlet program.”

Chomsky correctly notes that LBJ was a somewhat reluctant warrior in 1964, but he goes on to say that those who pressed for more aggressive action included “JFK’s doves.” In fact, most of the people putting pressure on LBJ to expand the Vietnam intervention had had only a brief association with Kennedy and the important people pressuring LBJ were CFR, Establishment luminaries such as Rusk and Bundy.

Chomsky asserts that Kennedy intensified the U.S. involvement that began in 1954 thus “laying the groundwork for the huge expansion of the war in later years.” As Laurence Shoup and William Minter show in Imperial Brain Trust, formal discussion of the need to control Southeast Asia began at the CFR in 1940. In Chomsky’s eyes, what Kennedy did in less than three years, under pressure from CFR Establishment types, is what lays the groundwork, not over twenty years of Establishment activity.

New Name
New Name
Nov 23, 2021 5:22 AM

Chomsky has repeatedly shown himself to be a fraud.

Researcher
Researcher
Nov 23, 2021 4:35 PM

So there was no motive to assassinate. Think about it.

Kennedy was THEIR guy. His whole family was always just as much part of the cartel as the Bush clan. JFK had already perpetrated and participated in a number of hoaxes, psyops and unnecessary wars. So why would the cryptocracy need or want to get rid of him? Zero motive unless they intended to use trauma based mind control and a scripted, faux assassination to derail all the anti-establishment and anti-war movements.

This idea of Camelot was a false image and a PR scam. A manufactured ideal that was as far from reality as could be, and as fictional as Excalibur and Merlin.

When I saw a bunch of Kennedy names in Epstein’s black book (if the Kennedy clan are quintessentially decent why are so many of them involved with someone who participates in fraud, sex trafficking, consorts with war criminals, Zionists and espionage) and realized the very same intel groups were behind the Russiagate hoax as the covid operation and also linked directly to the Kill-Gates Foundation, the larger truth materialized: The people involved in these psyops (Masons) and hoaxes, manufacture heroes and villains — JFK vs CIA, Trump vs Clinton/Obama/Biden, Hitler vs the Allies, RFK jnr vs Fauci, RFK jnr vs Gates, Ivermectin + HCQ vs the “vaccines” — as oppositional faux narratives to sell to the populace in order to keep us as spectators consuming the media manufactured events around us, too confused and bombarded with disinformation to understand what’s real and what’s not.

These manufactured terror events (domestic and international) keep the order follower organizations and systems in place, and solidify power to intel groups, NGOs (WHO, NATO, UN, BIS, IMF etc), think tanks, governments, armies, big tech and the police.

If we (the public) are spending all our time trying to figure out if something is even real, how can we create or participate in movements and actions towards physical, intellectual, educational, spiritual and economic freedom?

New Name
New Name
Nov 25, 2021 2:57 AM
Reply to  Researcher

Bullshit.

Researcher
Researcher
Nov 25, 2021 10:26 AM
Reply to  New Name

As usual, that’s not an answer. It’s a deflection. Because you have no response other than to defend the lies and to side with the liars.

Paul
Paul
Nov 22, 2021 11:27 PM

Western “experts” shaken: Afrika doesn’t vaccinate, but is healthier. (“Could it be that Africa is healthier BECAUSE it doesn’t vaccinate?” They are not willing to make this connection). https://www-welt-de.translate.goog/politik/ausland/article235185018/Coronavirus-Bisheriger-Verlauf-der-Pandemie-in-Afrika-verbluefft-Experten.html?_x_tr_sl=de&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=nui

Lysias
Lysias
Nov 23, 2021 6:03 PM
Reply to  Paul

Lots of hydrochlorothiazide and ivermectin used in Africa.

Moneycircus
Moneycircus
Nov 22, 2021 10:47 PM

Love the article. I was exactly 7 months old. Just moved to Nigeria where events would also turn sour.

The Great Reset Is Complete — A future retrospective

“It never happened. Nothing ever happened. Even while it was happening it wasn’t happening. It didn’t matter. It was of no interest.”

   — Harold Pinter’s 2005 Nobel Prize acceptance speech.

The Great Reset was part corporate collusion, part creed, drawing on the Harzburg Model of business management, which in turn derived from 1920-30s concepts of shaping workers through ideology and rejecting humanist models of worker participation.

The banks, corporations and tax-evading foundations liked the World Economic Forum for its claim to delegate and empower while creating fanatical adherents with an in-group loyalty.

This article looks back at The Great Reset through the eyes of citizens who took part.

***

It was not denied. It was not confirmed. All the time that it was coming to fruition it was not “even.” To have impact in the media jargon of those days, it had to be “a thing” and The Great Reset was not even a thing.

It was dismissed out of hand. Talk of an alleged takeover by the elites is “implausible,” said The Guardian in Dec 2020. The BBC said there were several books of that title but they got “hijacked by conspiracy theories.” [1]

Then, while it was not happening, it happened. But also it didn’t. For The Great Reset was a cover for a syndicate that pursued diverse, interconnected, vested interests.

While observers got entangled in the rigging, the Reset launched an armada that sailed under several flags: Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance (est 2000), comprising the World Health Organisation (WHO), the United Nations and the World Bank; and all the big corporations and privateer philanthropists.

The occasion was the Great Pandemic which weaponized the common cold. It was at the World Economic Forum (WEF) in 2016 that vaccines were proposed as an economic-political strategy. Next year at Davos six of the biggest pharma companies formed the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) to define adverse reactions and limit medical exemptions. Months later the World Bank launched $500 million Pandemic Bonds, collecting just before they were due to pay out, when the WHO declared a pandemic.

The payout was characteristic of public-private partnerships and the relationship between philanthro-capitalists and the taxpayer — with up-front payment by governments, and trials and regulations streamlining the path to corporate profit.

Although the World Economic Forum produced videos of robots and futuristic lifestyles, it returned again and again to health as the key to unlock public money and to drive control of the population. Some of the more telling imagery showed sharp-suited businessmen served by masked, faceless drudges — the common people reduced to little more than serfs. Some saw that as the true objective.

Public-private partnership or state corporatism

Whether it was respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) which like Coronavirus has the symptoms of the common cold, or Ebola hemorrhagic fever, the answer was the same: treat it as a public health emergency, harvest government money, gain control of the regulatory response and prime big pharma to put a needle in every arm — and a stamp in every vaccine passport.

Everything leant in the same direction: immediate, disruptive change in society as the pretext for new business projects. Almost always accompanied by a call on public funds. In earlier days this would have been denounced as sucking at the teat of subsidy but now we call it public-private partnership.

From a historical perspective, the armada looked a lot like state corporatism driven by the winds of war: the military censorship, suspension of legislatures and of public services from courts to healthcare.

The World Economic Forum, founded in 1971, brought to the table the Harzburg Model (HM) of business management, shaping worker behaviour through ideology. It suited the corporate and bureaucratic fashion for managed outcomes — or Management by Objectives.

Its master Klaus Schwab was perfect for the role as he had enough family connection to the “Third” revolution to be a suitably intimidating captain for the “Fourth” — especially to the managers and executives that he trained at his winter bootcamp in Davos, Switzerland. [2]

There he molded the Forum of Young Global Leaders and even younger Global Shapers (“the power of youth in action”) who formed his parapolitical wing. Behind the rounded, avuncular Klaus were hard-edged corporations with a history, including the descendants of IG Farben and those circling the Rockefeller sphere that gave the project its pharma-chemical and medical-eugenic flavour.

***

The first citizen speaks:

Generation A
I’m voice-typing this on my iPhone imPlant. It transcribes as I speak. Handy, but it may dock my social credit if I say the wrong thing. Better to use official jargon which disguises slips of the tongue or a derivative of Esperanto:

“An inclusive fair and efficient auxiliary language for the world with a propaedeutic effect allowing near-zero cost bootstrap over a couple of generations.”

Talking in English is a risk but — for this article — needs must. The only people who officially use their own language are the Chinese and the Russians: Всесоюзный ленинский коммунистический союз молодёжи is their equivalent.

It began anew with us. We got first dibs on the coolest technology and educators made sure we could use it: matching us to software and jobs.

Everything is online: health, education, shopping. Life is one big drop-down menu. The selections change all the time and are tailored to my digital identity but I think they’re new names for the same-old. Like multiple choice you can only choose what you’re offered.

The best way to earn extra credits is to join the youth organizations. Some of us are front line defenders — the eyes and ears — but the best of us have a chance to join the Global Shapers. We keep an eye on those who struggle to adapt, referring them to the relevant agencies and suggest solutions. It gives us “buy in” to the State.

The small business owner
So many of my fellow independent entrepreneurs sit on their hands waiting for better times.

If you wanted to save energy and resources, you should have made products last longer; stop with the endless updates; return to longer product cycles; make products modular, upgradeable and repairable — and end the wasteful marketing treadmill of planned obsolescence.

That didn’t happen. Maybe it was the mindset of Silicon Valley, wedded to works-in-progress, beta products subject to endless, iterative revisions. Though entrepreneurs rushed to consult The Book, Klaus Schwab did not address it in The Great Reset.

The bioethicist
Our economic challenge is to make Smart Cities energy self-sufficient, which is another way of saying carbon neutral. The quickest way to do that is to make humans power their own surveillance, linking their bodies to their digital ID.

Their physical and biological movement, inner energy — heart, brain or muscle — generates a detectable signal, sometimes transmits it and may, ultimately, power the receiving device, too.

Bio-implantables and nano-particulates were the key to this. The problem was that multiple, invasive technologies had to be trialed at mass scale. This required a large section of the population to overcome the bodies rejection and achieve compatibility

https://moneycircus.substack.com/p/the-great-reset-is-complete

S Cooper
S Cooper
Nov 22, 2021 10:38 PM

comment imagewing.com/en/free-png-nbhyz

“People of Germany: Have a nice day.”
comment imagewing.com/en/free-png-nbhyz

S Cooper
S Cooper
Nov 22, 2021 10:49 PM
Reply to  S Cooper

comment image

“People of Germany: Have a nice day.”
comment image

Hele
Hele
Nov 23, 2021 3:54 AM
Reply to  S Cooper

Cooper knocks it out…again!

citizen
citizen
Nov 23, 2021 9:00 AM
Reply to  S Cooper

new emoji for 2021

New Name
New Name
Nov 22, 2021 9:36 PM

References

Overall a good and comprehensive article. To the long list of references I would add MC Piper’s Final Judgement.

Seansaighdeor
Seansaighdeor
Nov 22, 2021 8:52 PM

Having just read Douglass book its an excellent way to a deeper perspective on the who and why. It provides an update after Jim Marrs Crossfire which was probably the definitive read until fairly recently.It offers much more background on the bigger threads and ties them together rather neatly.

That there are so many threads to the murder means it will be impossible to ever get a proper perspective on it. The act itself had obviously been in the planning for a long time and Douglass references the plot to kill Kennedy in Chicago that ironically was probably prevented by Oswald himself – an informant called ‘Lee’ rang the FBI to warn of a plot to kill Kennedy in Chicago (that had uncanny resemblances to the Dallas op) and the shooters or some of them were arrested.

Its a complex web and most people looking for details of who pulled the trigger and why will be wasting their time. Those details will never be known with the Kennedy assassination and even after 58 years there are still details coming out.

The fact Trump refused to make CIA documents available after all this time tells us that there is still more data to come.

The more revealing angle I believe is that the hidden element in the murder. Michael J. Hoffman details this in his Kill the King 33 essay. Kennedy was murdered in a place of masonic significance on or almost the 33rd parallel in broad daylight. It was in your face and the audacity of it was a show of power and force.

Today there is a strange cubic structure as some kind of memorial there although not at the actual location. What that reveals is an occultic significance to the murder which is disturbing. That reveals much more than the fantasy that some lone nut with a bolt action Carcano that didn’t even fire properly, was capable of firing off 3 shots in 6.5 seconds through some trees causing an inverted reaction to the head on the final shot.

‘They’ have been lying to us the whole time and the report of it was one of many although grandiose by most perspectives. You will know them by their symbolism.

Edwige
Edwige
Nov 22, 2021 11:54 PM
Reply to  Seansaighdeor

What did Jim Marrs push after ‘Crossfire’? The alien invasion – including supporting the notorious Scientology work ‘Battlefield Earth’. Example:

https://battlefieldearth.com/jim-marrs-aliens-and-battlefield-earth/

JustANumbersGuy
JustANumbersGuy
Nov 23, 2021 7:47 AM
Reply to  Edwige

He mentions “ezekiels fiery wheel” as evidence there are aliens, so it must be true

Cliff Edwards
Cliff Edwards
Nov 23, 2021 8:12 PM
Reply to  Edwige

Yes, he sounds about as nutty as numerology nerds.

New Name
New Name
Nov 23, 2021 5:31 AM
Reply to  Seansaighdeor

I have visited Dealey Plaza. The tour took us in extreme Dallas summer heat to the Texas theatre and Oswald’s rooming house. We managed to take in the grassy knoll and the back of the picket fence where a frame has been erected to prevent graffiti. “NWO hit” was one that someone squeezed in. The Sixth Floor Museum is a shill establishment that supports the fraudulent official version. You can’t actually approach the window that Oswald was alleged to have fired a rifle he never actually owned.

Seansaighdeor
Seansaighdeor
Nov 23, 2021 6:18 PM
Reply to  New Name

I imagine most people who visit the 6th Floor (the actual floor) do so for one reason and that is to get the view that ‘Oswald’ had. That it is blocked off is a strange thing – no normal reason why they would do that other than because looking out you realise how unrealistic the official version is.

Very disappointing to see Gary Mack (a one time prolific researcher) now running the 6th Floor Museum having ‘crossed over’ to the dark side.