JFK, & Vested interest.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

The Oxford English dictionary defines TERRORISM as, 1,The use of violence, and intimidation, especially for political purposes. 2,To fill with terror,to coerce with violence, or the threat of violence.COUP DETAT, 1, The sudden overthrow of a government, by force, or unconstitutional means 2, a sudden action taken to obtain power, or achive a desired result. COUP DE GRACE A stroke or blow thats puts an end to something. CONFLICT, a fight, a struggle, disagreement between people with different ideas,or beliefs.

Some questions, 1, How much of a threat did the Kennedy administration pose to powerful vested interest groups.

2, Did individuals within these groups have the means to arange a coup detat.

3,Did these individuals believe that Kennedy was acting against their best interests

would they have viewed him as a traitor because of this.

4,Were these individuals complicit in the murders, either planned, or actual,of others they percieved in this light.

5, What would they have expected from a second term of this administration, did they have reason to fear, for example, a withdrawal of the "Advisors"from Vietnam.Attacks on the oil depletion allowance, and the federal reserve, attempts at detente with the Soviets, overtures to Castro, a moritorium on ICBM's. How would they have viewed this accomodation with communism. could they have viewed Kennedys removal as a constitutional act.

      THE VESTED INTEREST GROUP

The powerful have always projected their interests as the core values of the society they infest.To sustain this ideological mumbo jumbo, requires a quiescent and docile populace, and domination over the media.Did Kennedy pose a threat to the status quo? to understand this question we need to put ourselves in the shoes of the vested interest group. Their only values are power & money, money & power, in their eyes any person or group that threatens this is a dangerous subversive, and, through their own twisted logic, anti-American, this is how the trick works,"As our interests are identical to the interests of the American people, anyone who threatens them must be, by definition, against America.This, to be fair is not just an American mindset, all ruling classes use a variation of this to justify their appropriation of the surplus value.I believe this group felt threatened by the Kennedy administration, and by their way of thinking, had good reason to fear a second term,with the strong possibility of RFK running in 68,this was all the justification they needed."In fair Verona where we set our scene, civil blood makes civil hands unclean"

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Stephen;

You are far closer to the answer than perhaps even you are aware.

REX

____

Motto: "Pro Bono Publico" ("For the Public Good")

http://www.novareinna.com/festive/krewes.html

Not to mention the forced integration of their "Beloved Tulane" in early 1963.

Tom

P.S. Of course, if one should begin to get too close, I am certain that they have another "Clay Shaw" to sacrifice to the gods.

P.P.S. The "Boston Club" of New Orleans is not named directly after Boston, MA.

It is fact named after the card game "Boston" in which Frenchmen who fought in the revolutionary war developed the game in which many a fortune has been made and lost.

The game of "Boston" was in fact a variation of the game of "Whist", in which later versions became "Bridge".

Within the "Boston Club" membership and "REX", lies the money and power of New Orleans, LA, as well as much of the South.

In 1963, there were few members who could not trace their direct linage to the Confederacy, as well as Tulane University.

That goes for the Boston Club as well as REX.

http://www.bestofneworleans.com/dispatch/2...1-16/blake.html

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And, in event it was missed when previously provided:

FOR AMERICA

____________

Type Entity: Non-Profit Corporation

Mailing Address: 208 LaSalle St. Chicago, ILL*

Registered Agent: Charles E. Dunbar, Jr. New Orleans, LA

Registered Agent: Sumter D. Marks, Jr. New Orleans, LA

Registered Agent: Louis B. Claverie, New Orleans, LA

Qualified: 1954

*208 LaSalle St., Chicago, IL, of course also being the address of the "Travellers Aide Society", from whom LHO received his financial assistance upon his return from the Soviet Union.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

"After leaving the FBI offices, Barrios and Gatlin met with a Mr. Dunbar, who occassionally represents the United Fruit Co. in New Orleans.

They asked for one million dollars from the United Fruit Co., in support of Barrios intended revolutionary movements in Guatemals, but they were unsuccessful in obtaining any commitment."

[Mark Knight]

(4) All main-stream media sing from their hymn sheet, and act as trained attack dogs on any "Nay-sayers"

I found your take a bit on the cynical side, but for the most part quite accurate.

However, journalists--or at least the mainstream media here in the US--seem to vascillate, first as cheerleaders of the powers-that-be, and then as attack dogs.

During the Kennedy administration, the early days the media were cheerleaders for the space program, for the Peace Corps, and for other forward-thinking programs. But as the administration started encountering problems, the press shifted into attack mode...first just gently nipping at the heels, and eventually trying to take a bite out of the "seat of the pants" of the administration. When the assassination occurred, the press then went into "circle-the-wagons" mode; for a time, whatever the new Johnson administration did, it was hunky-dory with the press.

But as Vietnam escalated, and as domestic violence exploded in places like the Watts section of Los Angeles and Detroit and ghettoes in other cities, the press also turned on Johnson. White it may have been in the form of a chihuahua with its teeth imbedded in Lyndon's backside, eventually the chihuahua wore down LBJ's resolve, and in March of 1968 LBJ became a single-term lame-duck president when he ruled out a run for re-election.

The press' honeymoon with Nixon was short, as they remembered the "Tricky Dick" Nixon of the 1950's...but they began on Nixon's side. After the Watergate break-in, the media began to react as sharks who smelled blood, and they wanted a taste of flesh. Agnew, whose abrasive attitude had irritated the press from the get-go, was thrown to the sharks and promptly devoured...but the press could sense that they finally had Nixon in their sights, and their tenacity on the Watergate story was remarkable.

Upon Nixon's resignation, Gerald Ford was looked upon by the media as a Nixon appointee, a sort of "stepchild-President," an object of both pity and scorn but little actual respect. Viewed as a "caretaker" of the office until the next election cycle, President Ford's term is remembered chiefly for his stumbles and errant golf shots rather than any policies, primarily because this is how the media portrayed him.

Fast-forward to 2001: After the 9/11 incidents, the media again "circled the wagons" as they did after Dallas, and anything the administration said or did was hunky-dory with the press once again. Only recently, when the US death toll in Iraq has passed the 1,800 person mark, is the media beginning to question policy...not unlike the Vietnam era.

The media can sense a turning of the tide of American public opinion...and the media always wants to be on the side of a winner. That explains why they were behind LBJ when the Gulf of Tonkin resolution came up, and why they were behind the anitwar protests a few short years later. That's why the press was on the side of the "commie-hunters" like Nixon in the early 1950's, and then teamed with those who exposed the excesses of "Tailgunner Joe" McCarthy a few short years later.

Some in the press certainly are "bought and paid for" by the power elite. I would suggest that an example of that might be last night's incident, in which Robert Novak, having been told beforehand that he was going to be asked about the Valerie Plame incident, walked off the set of a live program on CNN, ostensibly over an incident that seemed trivial in itself. But the vast majority of the media don't respond so much to the power elite as they do to their own perception of "what the public wants," however meatless that carcass might be.

[Christopher T. George]

(4) All main-stream media sing from their hymn sheet, and act as trained attack dogs on any "Nay-sayers"

I found your take a bit on the cynical side, but for the most part quite accurate.

However, journalists--or at least the mainstream media here in the US--seem to vascillate, first as cheerleaders of the powers-that-be, and then as attack dogs.

During the Kennedy administration, the early days the media were cheerleaders for the space program, for the Peace Corps, and for other forward-thinking programs. But as the administration started encountering problems, the press shifted into attack mode...first just gently nipping at the heels, and eventually trying to take a bite out of the "seat of the pants" of the administration. When the assassination occurred, the press then went into "circle-the-wagons" mode; for a time, whatever the new Johnson administration did, it was hunky-dory with the press.

But as Vietnam escalated, and as domestic violence exploded in places like the Watts section of Los Angeles and Detroit and ghettoes in other cities, the press also turned on Johnson. White it may have been in the form of a chihuahua with its teeth imbedded in Lyndon's backside, eventually the chihuahua wore down LBJ's resolve, and in March of 1968 LBJ became a single-term lame-duck president when he ruled out a run for re-election.

The press' honeymoon with Nixon was short, as they remembered the "Tricky Dick" Nixon of the 1950's...but they began on Nixon's side. After the Watergate break-in, the media began to react as sharks who smelled blood, and they wanted a taste of flesh. Agnew, whose abrasive attitude had irritated the press from the get-go, was thrown to the sharks and promptly devoured...but the press could sense that they finally had Nixon in their sights, and their tenacity on the Watergate story was remarkable.

Upon Nixon's resignation, Gerald Ford was looked upon by the media as a Nixon appointee, a sort of "stepchild-President," an object of both pity and scorn but little actual respect. Viewed as a "caretaker" of the office until the next election cycle, President Ford's term is remembered chiefly for his stumbles and errant golf shots rather than any policies, primarily because this is how the media portrayed him.

Fast-forward to 2001: After the 9/11 incidents, the media again "circled the wagons" as they did after Dallas, and anything the administration said or did was hunky-dory with the press once again. Only recently, when the US death toll in Iraq has passed the 1,800 person mark, is the media beginning to question policy...not unlike the Vietnam era.

The media can sense a turning of the tide of American public opinion...and the media always wants to be on the side of a winner. That explains why they were behind LBJ when the Gulf of Tonkin resolution came up, and why they were behind the anitwar protests a few short years later. That's why the press was on the side of the "commie-hunters" like Nixon in the early 1950's, and then teamed with those who exposed the excesses of "Tailgunner Joe" McCarthy a few short years later.

Some in the press certainly are "bought and paid for" by the power elite. I would suggest that an example of that might be last night's incident, in which Robert Novak, having been told beforehand that he was going to be asked about the Valerie Plame incident, walked off the set of a live program on CNN, ostensibly over an incident that seemed trivial in itself. But the vast majority of the media don't respond so much to the power elite as they do to their own perception of "what the public wants," however meatless that carcass might be.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Mark

A quick observation about the Robert Novak - Valerie Plame affair, it boggles my mind that it is Judith Miller in jail and not Novak. After all, Miller wrote nothing about Plame being a CIA operative, even if she knew about it, and yet Novak did make the information public. The whole affair stinks.

Stephen and George--

I don't know if you are aware but the American idea is that the United States is a classless society and that there is no upper class and no lower class, emanating from the idea that anyone can be successful if they really try. Of course, the idea that the nation has no class system is wrong, but it is something that appears to be believed, more or less, even in the face of facts to the contrary.

All my best

Chris

Edited August 5, 2005 by Christopher T. George

[Thomas H. Purvis]

The Oxford English dictionary defines TERRORISM as, 1,The use of violence, and intimidation, especially for political purposes. 2,To fill with terror,to coerce with violence, or the threat of violence.COUP DETAT, 1, The sudden overthrow of a government, by force, or unconstitutional means 2, a sudden action taken to obtain power, or achive a desired result. COUP DE GRACE A stroke or blow thats puts an end to something. CONFLICT, a fight, a struggle, disagreement between people with different ideas,or beliefs.

Some questions, 1, How much of a threat did the Kennedy administration pose to powerful vested interest groups.

2, Did individuals within these groups have the means to arange a coup detat.

3,Did these individuals believe that Kennedy was acting against their best interests

would they have viewed him as a traitor because of this.

4,Were these individuals complicit in the murders, either planned, or actual,of others they percieved in this light.

5, What would they have expected from a second term of this administration, did they have reason to fear, for example, a withdrawal of the "Advisors"from Vietnam.Attacks on the oil depletion allowance, and the federal reserve, attempts at detente with the Soviets, overtures to Castro, a moritorium on ICBM's. How would they have viewed this accomodation with communism. could they have viewed Kennedys removal as a constitutional act.

      THE VESTED INTEREST GROUP

The powerful have always projected their interests as the core values of the society they infest.To sustain this ideological mumbo jumbo, requires a quiescent and docile populace, and domination over the media.Did Kennedy pose a threat to the status quo? to understand this question we need to put ourselves in the shoes of the vested interest group. Their only values are power & money, money & power, in their eyes any person or group that threatens this is a dangerous subversive, and, through their own twisted logic, anti-American, this is how the trick works,"As our interests are identical to the interests of the American people, anyone who threatens them must be, by definition, against America.This, to be fair is not just an American mindset, all ruling classes use a variation of this to justify their appropriation of the surplus value.I believe this group felt threatened by the Kennedy administration, and by their way of thinking, had good reason to fear a second term,with the strong possibility of RFK running in 68,this was all the justification they needed."In fair Verona where we set our scene, civil blood makes civil hands unclean"

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Stephen;

You are far closer to the answer than perhaps even you are aware.

REX

____

Motto: "Pro Bono Publico" ("For the Public Good")

http://www.novareinna.com/festive/krewes.html

Not to mention the forced integration of their "Beloved Tulane" in early 1963.

Tom

P.S. Of course, if one should begin to get too close, I am certain that they have another "Clay Shaw" to sacrifice to the gods.

P.P.S. The "Boston Club" of New Orleans is not named directly after Boston, MA.

It is fact named after the card game "Boston" in which Frenchmen who fought in the revolutionary war developed the game in which many a fortune has been made and lost.

The game of "Boston" was in fact a variation of the game of "Whist", in which later versions became "Bridge".

Within the "Boston Club" membership and "REX", lies the money and power of New Orleans, LA, as well as much of the South.

In 1963, there were few members who could not trace their direct linage to the Confederacy, as well as Tulane University.

That goes for the Boston Club as well as REX.

http://www.bestofneworleans.com/dispatch/2...1-16/blake.html

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And, in event it was missed when previously provided:

FOR AMERICA

____________

Type Entity: Non-Profit Corporation

Mailing Address: 208 LaSalle St. Chicago, ILL*

Registered Agent: Charles E. Dunbar, Jr. New Orleans, LA

Registered Agent: Sumter D. Marks, Jr. New Orleans, LA

Registered Agent: Louis B. Claverie, New Orleans, LA

Qualified: 1954

*208 LaSalle St., Chicago, IL, of course also being the address of the "Travellers Aide Society", from whom LHO received his financial assistance upon his return from the Soviet Union.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

"After leaving the FBI offices, Barrios and Gatlin met with a Mr. Dunbar, who occassionally represents the United Fruit Co. in New Orleans.

They asked for one million dollars from the United Fruit Co., in support of Barrios intended revolutionary movements in Guatemals, but they were unsuccessful in obtaining any commitment."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Mr. Crawford Hatcher Ellis

Director: United Fruit Company

Office: 321 St. Charles St. New Orleans, LA

New Orleans, LA.

Mr. Ellis is a member of the Boston Club, Young Men's Gymnastic Club, and various Carnival Organizations.

___________________________________________________________________

FOR AMERICA

_____________

208 S. LaSalle ST., Chicago, IL

Registered Agent: Charles E. Dunbar, 321 St. Charles St., New Orleans, LA

Registered Agent: Sumter D. Marks, Jr. 321 St. Charles St., New Orleans, LA

Registered Agent: Louis B. Claverie, 321 St. Charles St., New Orleans, LA

____________________________________________________________________

REX

_____

February 24, 1914

REX: Mr. Crawford H. Ellis

DUKES: Mr. William Boatner Reily, Jr

PAGES: W. P. Burke, Jr.

____________________________________________________________________

REX

____

February 20, 1917

DUKES: William P. Burke

____________________________________________________________________

[Dawn Meredith]

After the Watergate break-in, the media began to react as sharks who smelled blood, and they wanted a taste of flesh. Agnew, whose abrasive attitude had irritated the press from the get-go, was thrown to the sharks and promptly devoured...but the press could sense that they finally had Nixon in their sights, and their tenacity on the Watergate story was remarkable.

__________________________

Great posts guys!! But:

With all due respect, Watergate was a totally controlled story by the CIA's Mockingbird. Woodward knew exactly where to "draw the line".

Dawn

I am going to try to respond within this post to points, so please bear with me

_______________________________________

Upon Nixon's resignation, Gerald Ford was looked upon by the media as a Nixon appointee, a sort of "stepchild-President," an object of both pity and scorn but little actual respect. Viewed as a "caretaker" of the office until the next election cycle, President Ford's term is remembered chiefly for his stumbles and errant golf shots rather than any policies, primarily because this is how the media portrayed him.

__________________________________-

Again controlled: Ford was payback for his role on the WC.(DM)

____________________________

Fast-forward to 2001: After the 9/11 incidents, the media again :

________________

Are not asking the tough questions: like who made all the $ on those put options??? (DM)

__________________________

Some in the press certainly are "bought and paid for" by the power elite.

__________________________

****I would say "most" in the press hold this distinction. (DM)

I think this is an excellent description of true terrorism and totally agree with Steven's posts. Only now they don't have to actually assassinate a person. Just find his vulnerability- (sex)- and put her on his knee (Donna Rice: Gary Hart). Have some fun while derailing the man's campaign,-especially a Sen. who spent two years looking into the assassination of JFK- have the bimbo on his knee on a boat called "Monkey Business". Boy those Republicans sure have one heck of a sense of humor!! Just ask Bill Clinton.

Dawn

[Dawn Meredith]

I tried to do my responses in red, to make it easier to distinguish and not have to utilize drawing lines... but it did not work...sorry.

Will continue to experiment.

I'm technically challenged.

Dawn

[Guest Stephen Turner]

Dawn, Tom, Chris, Mark, some excellent points,sorry I have not replied sooner but I have been away for the W/E.I will reply to all your points in more depth later,the nature of this thread was to look at how powerful vested interest groups use conflict, and terrorism to destroy oposition,and further their interests.any other thoughts on this would be appreciated.... Steve.

[Guest Stephen Turner]

Historical comparison (1)

Jean Jaures, 1859- 1914.

A brilliant philosophy professor,he rose to become the leader of the French Socialist party. Vigourously opposed to the first W/W, he was seen by many as the last hope of avoiding this catastrophy.

He was assassinated by a lone nut (Right wing variety) on the day W/W one broke out, pleasing ultra hawks, and arms manufacturors everywhere.

[Guest Stephen Turner]

Historical comparison (2).

Leon Trotsky.

On the 20th of August 1940, Trotsky was assassinated by Ramon Mercador, an agent sent to Mexico by the Stalinist GPU. This was more than a malicious after thought by Stalin, it was the culmination of a systematic and bloody terror, designed to wipe out a whole generation of Bolshevik leaders, and cement the rise of a new bureaucratic ruling class, and the advent of State Capitalism.

[Guest Stephen Turner]

Historical comparison (3)

Salvador Allende.

Since the early 1960's Aerican policy in Chile had one objective,to keep Allende from power at all costs. Nixon and Kissinger set the CIA against the legaly elected Allende government, not to preserve democracy, but to prevent a charismatic socialist leader from providing a democratic alternative to big business driven American policy.

[Guest Stephen Turner]

Hisorical comparison (4)

Hugo Chavez.

Opps, sorry, that one hasnt happened YET!

[Guest Stephen Turner]

Final two examples from literally thousands that could be given.

James Connally, Socialist leader of Irelands citizen army at the time of the Easter uprising. EXECUTED,or put another way ASSASSINATED.

Wolf Tone, Irish revolutionary, who took his own life rather than give the brittish the satisfaction of executing him, ASSASSINATION BY PROXY.

[Guest Stephen Turner]

Question to Forum members.

Why do you imagine that nearly all who meet their end in this fashion are either Socialists, liberals, or reformers.

[John Dolva]

Question to Forum members.

Why do you imagine that nearly all who meet their end in this fashion are either Socialists, liberals, or reformers.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh well, the Idea is still alive, children are still being born.

[Guest Stephen Turner]

Question to Forum members.

Why do you imagine that nearly all who meet their end in this fashion are either Socialists, liberals, or reformers.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh well, the Idea is still alive, children are still being born.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How true John, how it must infuriate certain groups that you cant kill a belief, end of history indeed.