Jump to content
The Education Forum

The National Security State’s Assassination of John F. Kennedy

Recommended Posts

Poster's note: This article is highly recommended for its scope and accuracy. It reads like a prosecutor's closing argument to the jury in a criminal case.


The National Security State’s Assassination of John F. Kennedy

By Jacob Hornberger


November 23, 2013


Edited by Douglas Caddy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

the only problem I have with this article is the old "world war three" scenario....

the rationale for an institutional cover up based on "the russians would have been so offended by being accused of killing JFK that it would start world war three!"
or that it was an "operation northwoods" style "Lets get the ruskies for killing Kennedy" is again to reduce the russians to being dumb robots.

same can be said about Castro...Castro and the Russians were well read, cultured people who understood statecraft. It wouldn't be in anyones best interest to go around killing world leaders.

The only people who thought killing and or deposing democratically elected leaders as part of an extended strategic world policy was the US...

this continues today.

the thin excuses thrown around post coup for why it might have been desireable to withhold or distort information is as weak as the old "national security" excuses...

national security is the fifth amendment for state sponsored murder. Period

Edited by Blair Dobson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"4. Indeed, we’re not even supposed to think that anything was unusual when a team of Secret Service agents brandished guns and forced their way out of Parkland Hospital with the president’s body, implicitly threatening to kill the official Dallas medical examiner who was just doing his job by insisting that the body remain at Parkland to undergo an autopsy, as required by state law. We’re just supposed to accept the idea that federal agents would violate the law, threaten to kill hospital personnel, and jeopardize a criminal prosecution, all on their own initiative, rather than cooperate with state officials in the investigation of a very serious crime, as we would ordinarily expect them to do. "

Was it not Roy Kellerman himself who led the charge in this incident? The very Roy Kellerman who was in the drivers seat of the presidential limousine and did nothing ( but look back ) when the shots rang out?

For those who say " the Secret Service has come a long way since the JFK murder," give me a break. They were trained to handle a situation like the one in Dealy Plaza and had the energy to do so - as demonstrated by the Parkland incident.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Douglas for posting this great essay. Like Blair I used to think the WW 3 scenario unlikely, but Newman's book Oswald and the CIA changed that. Newman posits that Oswald went to Mexico as an extension of the smear campaign against the FPCC that he undertook in New Orleans, but that unbeknownst to him Angleton and perhaps Phillips were running an operation piggybacking on that one designed to tie Oswald to Kostikov, the head of the KGB's assassination unit, who was conveniently stationed at the Russian embassy in Mexico City. The purpose of this second secret plot, withheld from even Win Scott, the head of the CIA station in Mexico, was to set up Oswald as the patsy in Dealey Plaza so that any investigation after the assassinations of JFK and Oswald would be stymied by the fear of setting off a nuclear conflict with the USSR. Angleton made sure to personally clean out Win Scott's files and the contents of his safe after Scott's death, according to Scotts widow.

I have been pondering a deep conspiracy scenario about Angleton for a long while, and this seems like a good place to mention it. Angleton spent his career searching in vain for a Soviet mole in the CIA. We also know that he was good friends with Kim Philby at least until Philby was exposed as a Soviet spy. What I have wondered all these years is whether Angleton himself was the Soviet mole. It is said that he ruined the careers of good and loyal agents, and that his incessant search was destructive. Apparently much of the CIA's records on the Soviet defector Nosenko are still classified. After the assassination JFK's partner in trying to end the cold war, Khrushchev, was ousted by Soviet hardliners, and the cold war continued unabated for two decades, during which the military industrial establishments in both the US and the USSR made billions. Is it at least possible that the money interests on both sides superseded their ideological differences? Could a man like Angleton have been working for those transnational interests? Might the cold war have been simply a creation of both military industrial establishments? In that case killing JFK would be seen as beneficial to the so-called hardliners in both countries. I know its a stretch, and if anyone reads this they will probably rip this theory to shreds, which by the way I would welcome.

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
  • Create New...