Jump to content
The Education Forum

The John F. Kennedy Assassination: Your Theory


John Simkin
 Share

Recommended Posts

I thought it might be worth creating a thread where members explain their theory of the John Kennedy assassination. This should include sections on the motive, the planning, the operation, the cover-up and the evidence supporting the theory.

This will obviously create a great deal of debate. However, if you want to comment on any individual theory, you should use the quotation mechanism and start another thread on it. This thread should only include individual member theories. I will delete irrelevant postings. I will then pin the thread and it could then be used as a reference point for future discussions.

After a couple of weeks, when hopefully most members have posted their theories, I will put them into categories and organize a poll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought it might be worth creating a thread where members explain their theory of the John Kennedy assassination. This should include sections on the motive, the planning, the operation, the cover-up and the evidence supporting the theory.

This will obviously create a great deal of debate. However, if you want to comment on any individual theory, you should use the quotation mechanism and start another thread on it. This thread should only include individual member theories. I will then pin the thread and it could then be used as a reference point for future discussions.

After a couple of weeks, when hopefully most members have posted their theories, I will put them into categories and organize a poll.

The full version is so vast into this. I mean for me it is MILITARY, UNDERGROUND, HOOVER, LBJ, and some FBI, CIA and even into some organizational companies of involvement. As for the truth on it most probable will never admit. Only can say the trhreat if the truth does come out America still is under a nuke threat attack because only a few do not want the truth out.

Still papers in NARA show the threat to be real on this issue. I have seen them all that hold the cover up and why it is not to come out.

I have been told on a phone by some who are underground roots the same thing. SO why examine it totally we are at risk to have that.

Hillary Clinton even did a number on that during the election, "I will release out a FEW numbers of JFK papers IF you vote for me?" HER REAL TOTAL QUOTE TO US. I scjffed on it and went at her later on. I mean really at her on it. SHE now made the deal or should I say agreement to do the list I gave her. Time will now tell.

It is more than a few papers that still show cover up. It is real and it is there and yet they tell us they gave us the truth on Oswald. Yeah right. There is paper in NARA that hold real questions on Oswald even being involved.

The truth of the matter is there is witnesses and they are to frightened to tell openly what they know. Take Military one cried on a phone while talking to me. YES I heard something the day after JFK was shot. "it went rather well yesterday don't you think?" a man in high office saying to another and the other replied back YES IT DID." That is military involvement. As high up as that in our ranks.

As low ranks as poor Oswald to take the heat and got shoved into a positon he knew he would be killed by a women.

I for one know it snow balled into a major thing and into to many areas of topic.

As for motive, WAR the over all excuse to get more involved.

As for motive, hate of JFK to certain persons,

As for motive, Cuba not getting freedom and casinos to run MONEY.

As for motive, Russia and this is a hot one to not have war on them. Why we get threatened today LIGHT SUBJECT AND TO EARLY TO GIVE OUT INFO ON. Our threat when in a woven pattern means their freedon from prosecution on USA people today to get away with the crime of murdering JFK. Why the cover up's there is with worry. They had to have at least ONE perons involved who is from Russia. Maybe more than one. Not sure but one is involved.

As for reason, who is the one most behind killing JFK is not so much LBJ but HOOVER. His reason is so sick. Vendetta against JFK father for remarks on him being a gay. So he had to get him hard. Possible reasons more is to help get a war into place and use Russia as a pawn but knew it was to risky with them. SO GO AROUND IT. Vietnam.

OH it was a well planned and still the most involved cover up muder and hate crime of ever done in history. When you have top persons involved.

I have gone undergrowund and hate to say the darn things go on today as they did years ago. Only undergrownd regrets doing the deeds and bidding of what OUR gov. did to them afterwards of the killings they put on them to do and then to have been killed off so much themselves.

ANOTHER MOTIVE OF OUR GOV> get ride of Mafia.

Hoover's overall great plans. I will take the Mafia out. SO they used them as the hate which now is not the thing and they know they killled a great man. A man who had the real rights to live.

I loved talking to them even though they could not talk to me directly and it had to be done carefully. I will never deny that I have gone all the way and did talk to them to learn. I learned a great deal more than I ever told. They HOLD EVIDENCE more on JFK and many films you use to post your points have been tampered with even though they tell you it was not. IT WAS.

There is no films and photo's of showing Files there on the streets why they used him as a front to bring out facts on it. HIS COVER STORY is not the real story. Just a front to help bring out the real story.

NO PAM does not have it either and neither does Wim have it. I do. They also have not the rights to say any of it either. I do so I am told.

There is something I could do and so far have not done. I keep that to myself and it could be my proof. I wrote it down now but erased it. I have to it is to much to tell you. I am also not sure to do more.

IT has to do with codes.

IT has to do with a man locked up in Prison in Italy.

It has to do with whom told me info that some of it is down here.

It has to do with a bible who from gov. of Italy was given out to US to see if they can decode it.

Then US could not so it got sent to the Vatican and now is back into Italy's hands.

Now they say maybe it is not coded and reason HE reads the bible and prays all the time.

I love this man. I learned about him briefly. I know many would be upset that i even come close to him to talk to him indirectly. I wish I knew how to do this another way.

What I am now concerned about is what John Dean stated on TV a few days ago. That Bush may not be indited for the things he did wrong. I can and have in hold a message to go back to Gov. Ed Rendell and tell more and in fact get a bit huffy over a few and one being him.

See the tragic part of JFK is it hurt and or killed so many and one being also Nixon in Watergate issues.

John Dean in his book does tell more and also linked back to JKF as well The book is called WORSE than WATERGATE.

In fact it is worse than Watergate even JFK is the timing of now who is in office here. The great one to kills any hopes of any truth coming out, still can not crush it all. THAT IS BUSH

The great groupies from Texas. Bush's Johnsons and a few more. Chapman etc.

The businesses who corupt businesses is going on still in America under the great one named Bush. Does any of this make sense for Wallstreet.

IT is bring you down if you do not cooperate with me. I think a lot of that is now underway.

Enron DVD from them shows BUSH and CHENEY involved in the downfall of Enron.

I have the DVD don't look for it now into any Blockblusters or any other store it is now taken off the markets and sheelves. Also who killed the Electric car also taken off the shelves in Video stores.

Bush does not want OIL to go out of business.

WHO LOST THE BATTLE on ELECTION who is now into CLEAN THE AIR that is one person AL GORE to BUSH.

OIL is also the business behind JFK as well It went into businesses and for good reasons.

Hoover way back knew a day would come. Hoover already had help from Preston Bush and his son young Bush.

Indictments should be done to Bush and his father NOW. Also to many who were behind JFK.

What John Dean states is that there is little time to indict a president while he is still in office. I hate to say this but how in the heck can a person indict a pres. when he keeps changing the US ATTY in the area when one writes into do that Bush did this to several people and not just to me? Skulls and Bones points are no joke. Bush father was involved and should have been brought down on the mere notes he passed involved with JFK. The notes that got lost in FBI. Later FBI had him as leader. I guess he had to find out if the notes were gone for good.

Edited by Nancy Eldreth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good initiative by John Simkin.

My take is that it was a coup d' état orchestrated by the CIA , right wing oil men and key members of organized crime. It was executed on ground zero by Cuban exiles and CIA/mafia hitmen, and covered up by LBJ and J. Edgar Hoover, who both had the means and the motive for the deed.

Gee, only two sentences!

Here's another summary:

http://www.peterrdevries.com/bio-kennedy.htm

Now, I am curious to the submissions of Denis Pointing, Duke Lane, Gary Mack, etc ........

Wim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Motive

I believe the plan to kill JFK was triggered when the CIA discovered that he was involved in secret negotiations with Fidel Castro via Lisa Howard and Jean Daniel. Right-wing elements within the CIA believed that if these negotiations were successful Castro would remain in power. What is more, this could possibly herald the end of the Cold War. This would have tremendous ramifications for the armaments industry. This was therefore a motive for businessmen who had been enjoying high profits from the Cold War to finance the operation. The same goes for the Texas oil industry who was being threatened in 1963 with the end of the oil depletion allowance.

Planning

I believe that the planning of the assassination was carried out by a group within the CIA that included David Atlee Phillips, David Morales, Rip Robertson and Carl Jenkins. They recruited anti-Castro exiles and their associates to carry out the operation. This included Chi Chi Quintero, Tony Cuesta, Herminio Diaz Garcia, Virgilio Gonzalez, Roland Masferrer, Bernardo De Torres, Felipe Vidal Santiago, Roy Hargreaves, John Martino, Irving Davidson, John Martino, Steve Wilson and Edwin Collins. It should be pointed out that these individuals were involved in only certain parts of the plot and none had an overall view of what was happening.

The Operation

The objective of the assassination was to trigger an invasion of Cuba. Therefore, the planners needed patsies that had links to Castro’s Cuba. The plan was for at least one of the patsies to be killed at the scene and at least one to getaway so that they could be traced back to Cuba. The operation went to plan but for the killing of Oswald.

The Cover-Up

The planning of the operation took into account the subsequent cover-up. For example, the use of Oswald as a patsy compromised both the FBI and the CIA. The use of individuals who had who had been involved in previous CIA operations also made a full and comprehensive investigation undesirable.

The William Sullivan FBI investigation of the assassination opened-up the possibility of J. Edgar Hoover exposing the activities of the CIA. However, Hoover was in great sympathy with those who wanted the Cold War to continue and therefore participated in the cover-up that was by this time being led by James Jesus Angleton. It also covered-up the incompetence of the FBI concerning Oswald.

Although the structure of the plot ensured the cover-up by the CIA and the FBI, the second objective, the overthrow of Castro, was not achieved. The reason for this was LBJ refused to go along with this part of the conspiracy. Officially, it was because LBJ feared that if he took action against Castro it would trigger a nuclear war. The real reason was that LBJ realised that an invasion of Cuba could bring with it tremendous pressure from the international community to carry out a full and comprehensive investigation into the assassination. For example, it would not be acceptable to say that the evidence that Castro was behind the death of JFK would have to remain sealed until 2017.

The Evidence

The evidence that there was more than one gunman has been much talked about since 1963 and is not worth repeating here. The evidence for the operation itself mainly comes from the confessions by David Morales, Carl Jenkins, Chi Chi Quintero, Tony Cuesta and John Martino and from CIA contract workers who will have to remain nameless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Motive

I believe the plan to kill JFK was triggered when the CIA discovered that he was involved in secret negotiations with Fidel Castro via Lisa Howard and Jean Daniel. Right-wing elements within the CIA believed that if these negotiations were successful Castro would remain in power. What is more, this could possibly herald the end of the Cold War. This would have tremendous ramifications for the armaments industry. This was therefore a motive for businessmen who had been enjoying high profits from the Cold War to finance the operation. The same goes for the Texas oil industry who was being threatened in 1963 with the end of the oil depletion allowance.

Planning

I believe that the planning of the assassination was carried out by a group within the CIA that included David Atlee Phillips, David Morales, Rip Robertson and Carl Jenkins. They recruited anti-Castro exiles and their associates to carry out the operation. This included Chi Chi Quintero, Tony Cuesta, Herminio Diaz Garcia, Virgilio Gonzalez, Roland Masferrer, Bernardo De Torres, Felipe Vidal Santiago, Roy Hargreaves, John Martino, Irving Davidson, John Martino, Steve Wilson and Edwin Collins. It should be pointed out that these individuals were involved in only certain parts of the plot and none had an overall view of what was happening.

The Operation

The objective of the assassination was to trigger an invasion of Cuba. Therefore, the planners needed patsies that had links to Castro's Cuba. The plan was for at least one of the patsies to be killed at the scene and at least one to getaway so that they could be traced back to Cuba. The operation went to plan but for the killing of Oswald.

The Cover-Up

The planning of the operation took into account the subsequent cover-up. For example, the use of Oswald as a patsy compromised both the FBI and the CIA. The use of individuals who had who had been involved in previous CIA operations also made a full and comprehensive investigation undesirable.

The William Sullivan FBI investigation of the assassination opened-up the possibility of J. Edgar Hoover exposing the activities of the CIA. However, Hoover was in great sympathy with those who wanted the Cold War to continue and therefore participated in the cover-up that was by this time being led by James Jesus Angleton. It also covered-up the incompetence of the FBI concerning Oswald.

Although the structure of the plot ensured the cover-up by the CIA and the FBI, the second objective, the overthrow of Castro, was not achieved. The reason for this was LBJ refused to go along with this part of the conspiracy. Officially, it was because LBJ feared that if he took action against Castro it would trigger a nuclear war. The real reason was that LBJ realised that an invasion of Cuba could bring with it tremendous pressure from the international community to carry out a full and comprehensive investigation into the assassination. For example, it would not be acceptable to say that the evidence that Castro was behind the death of JFK would have to remain sealed until 2017.

The Evidence

The evidence that there was more than one gunman has been much talked about since 1963 and is not worth repeating here. The evidence for the operation itself mainly comes from the confessions by David Morales, Carl Jenkins, Chi Chi Quintero, Tony Cuesta and John Martino and from CIA contract workers who will have to remain nameless.

John, While you are short on evidence, there is more to support your theories than the confessions of those you mention as being involved.

In addition, I would say that the Cubans who were recruited came from similar operations that were already in place and in motion to assassinate Castro, one of which was exposed to RFK so he could be checkmated and not pose a threat after the assassination.

I wouldn't expect a response from those who have other theories - ie. Gus Russo - Oswald did it alone at the behest of Castro, or Posner/Bugliosi/McMillan/Rhan - Oswald did it alone because he was secret psychopath, or the Mafia did it (Blakey, Kaiser, et al), or the CIA (Salandria, Mellen, Newman).

As far as I can see there really are only four possibilities:

1) Oswald did it alone because he was nuts, and there's no relation between Dealey Plaza and history or politics (per Bugliosi, Posner, McMillan, Rhan) and we just give it meaning by dreaming up conspiracies.

2) Oswald did it alone for political or professional motive/reasons at the behest of Castro, KGB or CIA mind control, or as a real assassin like the Jackel (per Russo, et al)

3) Oswald was one of a number of shooters or a patsy in a well planned and executed domestic conspiracy designed and carried out by mid-level CIA officers with mafia/anti-Castro Cubans, in revenge or retaliation for Bay of Pigs, etc.

4) Oswald was a patsy in a well planned and executed coup, an inside job in which those responsible for the assassination took over the government and changed policies.

Three of the four are conspiracies. Only 20% of people believe it was No.1, or no-conspiracy.

It was to eleminate the possibility the assassination was #2, a possible foreign born conspiracy (Cuba/KGB) that LBJ used as excuse to form the Warren Commission and quash what really happened.

The true answer can only be one of those possibilities, and I think it can and must be determined without a doubt which is the way it really happened.

BK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although I think we really can't know exactly who was behind the assassinaton at this point, if I were to speculate....

I would say that JFK was killed by a massive conspiracy, involving the most powerful forces in our society. There was no one man who okayed the idea, rather it was a consortium of elite individuals and groups arriving at a consensus. I think Oliver Stone portrayed it pretty accurately in "JFK." I would include J. Edgar Hoover, LBJ, McGeorge Bundy, Emory Roberts, William Greer and Roy Kellerman, as the most visible individuals whose actions reveal they had prior knowledge of the assassination. I tend to agree with Jim Garrison, and think that Oswald was probably some kind of undercover agent who was told to infiltrate a group that was plotting to assssinate the president. This "ground level" of conspirators would have included Jack Ruby, Guy Bannister, David Ferrie and Clay Shaw. The true masterminds behind it were probably attached to a shadowy international group, perhaps something like Permindex.

As for motives, I believe there were many. The primary motive would have been JFK's decision to start withdrawing troops from Vietnam. Add to this his animosity towards the old guard in the CIA, which apparently went so far as to cause him to question whether the agency ought to be abolished; his war against the Mafia (the only administration to ever really go after them); his American University "peace" speech, which threatened to undermine the Cold War mindset completely; his even more dangerous speech about openess in government and against censorship and secret societies; his apparent disputes with David Ben Gurion over Israel's development of nuclear weapons. JFK had more powerful enemies than any president in American history.

That's my two cents worth. Speculation aside, I believe that the demonstrably massive and ongoing coverup proves that there were extremely powerful forces behind the conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy.

Edited by Don Jeffries
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://wilstar.com/theories.htm

""scientific law," "hypothesis," and "theory.""

_______________________

"Lay people often misinterpret the language used by scientists. And for that reason, they sometimes draw the wrong conclusions as to what the scientific terms mean.

Three such terms that are often used interchangeably are "scientific law," "hypothesis," and "theory."

In layman’s terms, if something is said to be “just a theory,” it usually means that it is a mere guess, or is unproved. It might even lack credibility. But in scientific terms, a theory implies that something has been proven and is generally accepted as being true.

Here is what each of these terms means to a scientist:

Scientific Law: This is a statement of fact meant to explain, in concise terms, an action or set of actions. It is generally accepted to be true and univseral, and can sometimes be expressed in terms of a single mathematical equation. Scientific laws are similar to mathematical postulates. They don’t really need any complex external proofs; they are accepted at face value based upon the fact that they have always been observed to be true.

Specifically, scientific laws must be simple, true, universal, and absolute. They represent the cornerstone of scientific discovery, because if a law ever did not apply, then all science based upon that law would collapse."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The plan was for at least one of the patsies to be killed at the scene and at least one to getaway so that they could be traced back to Cuba. The operation went to plan but for the killing of Oswald.

Which of these two patsies was Oswald (was he supposed to get away or be killed at the scene?), and why do you assume there was another?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stephen Turner

The main players were members of the JCS, Lemnitzer, LeMay and Craig, and a disguntled Dulles. The shooting was masterminded by Ex Gen Walker, who probably provided the snipers from groups such as the Minutemen. Kennedy's refusal to give the green light to operation Northwoods, or to escalate the action in Vietnam helped to sign his death warent, although there were plenty of other reasons. The attempted shooting of Walker months before was the beggining of the patsy trap, everything else flowed from there, as the false trail was laid. Hoover, and LBJ, both of whom benifited from Kennedy's assassination were the main agents of the cover up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Motive

I believe the plan to kill JFK was triggered when the CIA discovered that he was involved in secret negotiations with Fidel Castro via Lisa Howard and Jean Daniel. Right-wing elements within the CIA believed that if these negotiations were successful Castro would remain in power. What is more, this could possibly herald the end of the Cold War. This would have tremendous ramifications for the armaments industry. This was therefore a motive for businessmen who had been enjoying high profits from the Cold War to finance the operation. The same goes for the Texas oil industry who was being threatened in 1963 with the end of the oil depletion allowance.

Planning

I believe that the planning of the assassination was carried out by a group within the CIA that included David Atlee Phillips, David Morales, Rip Robertson and Carl Jenkins. They recruited anti-Castro exiles and their associates to carry out the operation. This included Chi Chi Quintero, Tony Cuesta, Herminio Diaz Garcia, Virgilio Gonzalez, Roland Masferrer, Bernardo De Torres, Felipe Vidal Santiago, Roy Hargreaves, John Martino, Irving Davidson, John Martino, Steve Wilson and Edwin Collins. It should be pointed out that these individuals were involved in only certain parts of the plot and none had an overall view of what was happening.

The Operation

The objective of the assassination was to trigger an invasion of Cuba. Therefore, the planners needed patsies that had links to Castro’s Cuba. The plan was for at least one of the patsies to be killed at the scene and at least one to getaway so that they could be traced back to Cuba. The operation went to plan but for the killing of Oswald.

The Cover-Up

The planning of the operation took into account the subsequent cover-up. For example, the use of Oswald as a patsy compromised both the FBI and the CIA. The use of individuals who had who had been involved in previous CIA operations also made a full and comprehensive investigation undesirable.

The William Sullivan FBI investigation of the assassination opened-up the possibility of J. Edgar Hoover exposing the activities of the CIA. However, Hoover was in great sympathy with those who wanted the Cold War to continue and therefore participated in the cover-up that was by this time being led by James Jesus Angleton. It also covered-up the incompetence of the FBI concerning Oswald.

Although the structure of the plot ensured the cover-up by the CIA and the FBI, the second objective, the overthrow of Castro, was not achieved. The reason for this was LBJ refused to go along with this part of the conspiracy. Officially, it was because LBJ feared that if he took action against Castro it would trigger a nuclear war. The real reason was that LBJ realised that an invasion of Cuba could bring with it tremendous pressure from the international community to carry out a full and comprehensive investigation into the assassination. For example, it would not be acceptable to say that the evidence that Castro was behind the death of JFK would have to remain sealed until 2017.

The Evidence

The evidence that there was more than one gunman has been much talked about since 1963 and is not worth repeating here. The evidence for the operation itself mainly comes from the confessions by David Morales, Carl Jenkins, Chi Chi Quintero, Tony Cuesta and John Martino and from CIA contract workers who will have to remain nameless.

Noticeably absent are E. Howard Hunt and Antonio Veciana.

Do you think that they were involved?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I can see there really are only four possibilities:

1) Oswald did it alone because he was nuts, and there's no relation between what happened at Dealey Plaza and history or politics (per Bugliosi, Posner, McMillan, Rhan) and we just give it meaning by dreaming up conspiracies.

2) Oswald did it alone for political or professional motive/reasons at the behest of Castro, KGB or CIA mind control, or as a real assassin like the Jackel (per Russo, et al)

3) Oswald was one of a number of shooters or a patsy in a well planned and executed domestic conspiracy designed and carried out by government outsiders mafia/anti-Castro Cubans, mid-level CIA officers, in revenge/retaliation for Bay of Pigs, etc.

4) Oswald was a patsy in a well planned and executed coup, an inside job in which those responsible for the assassination took over the government and changed policies.

Three of the four are conspiracies. Only 20% of people believe it was No.1, or no-conspiracy.

It was to eleminate the possibility the assassination was #2, a possible foreign born conspiracy (Cuba/KGB) that LBJ used as excuse to form the Warren Commission and quash what really happened.

The true answer can only be one of those possibilities, and I think it can and must be determined without a doubt which is the way it really happened.

BK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I learned from David Talbot's book, Brothers, the President and Robert Kennedy were totally isolated. The military chiefs of staff hated Kennedy. Supposedly, William Greer, the limo driver, an Irish Catholic, also hated Kennedy. Kennedy had so many enemies. They thought he was soft on Communism. It's hard to pick and choose. The various intelligence agencies, the Cuban Exiles, the oil barons, the military, J. Edgar Hoover, LBJ, the Secret Service...

I would start with the military, the CIA and the Cuban Exiles. The murder would save LBJ from prosecution having to do with the Bobby Baker scandal.

The financiers were: the Morgans, the Rockefellers, the Duponts, the Murchisons, the Bushes, the Rothschilds and a few other wealthy families. The purpose was to ultimately make the US the world ruler of all countries, which would take decades. But they got off to a good start.

Oswald, killed by Jack Ruby, was a Russian, who trained in English for years and returned to this country as the defector, Lee Harvey Oswald. I can't see how the 2 redheads, the Nortons, fit into this, but researcher John Armstrong believes they do. Ralph Geb was also involved closely with them.

Basically, the Military Industrial and Intelligence Complex killed President John Kennedy.

Kathy C

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's extremely difficult to come up with the most logical, plausible theory when we're still trying to determine just what the facts of the case are. And until we know the facts, everything we propose is simply an unsubstantiated hypothesis.

We can't even agree on how many shots there were, from where, with what weapon(s). About the only facts not in dispute are that JFK was shot, and it occurred at the Elm Street portion of Dealy Plaza, after passing the TSBD but prior to the triple underpass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

A query. In "Crossfire," Jim Marrs made the memorable conclusion that the wish - not necessarily the mechanical plot - to kill JFK was a centrist affair, not exclusively right-wing. I don't have Marrs' book with me now, but I have taken his meaning as being that Kennedy's enemies coalesced across a spectrum of political, economic, social, and national security interests from left to right.

Do people agree with this conclusion today? Mr. Simkin has lately given us some grounding in the relation between the Profumo KGB sting and the assassination climate in America, which argues (along with other factors) that JFK's philandering was seen as a security risk above political considerations - possibly to spymasters concerned with rooting out Soviet moles, and policemen lubricious about setting up the similarly flawed Dr. King as a KGB plant.

Though, as the late G. P. Hemming and other guerrilla ops and their bagmen have offered, a plethora of groups wanting JFK dead were dumping their satchels out, and the proceeds were scooped up with promises of satisfaction that were achieved only in the decisive act and the regime change, not necessarily in any expected political or ideational change.

Any thoughts on the right-wing vs. centrist character of the plot, as opposed to the wish?

Edited by David Andrews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...