Oswald was not alone
CharlesB at SPAMCNCL.ci.detroit.mi.us
Fri Mar 30 07:18:25 MST 2001
>>> nemonemini at yahoo.com 03/29/01 07:11PM >>>
The mystifications of Camelot are undoubtedly a bit
much, especially in some of the investigators into the
Kennedy assassination. This theme tends to be a center
of gravity of any number of the books in the genre,
many of which are very confused. And I can understand
the impatience with the question of who killed
Kennedy. It is probably correct that it hardly matters
in the long run, for the current moment is different
now in detail, though not in essence,for at the time
Kennedy was shot, the British Empire was still in
place, sort of. So it hardly matters now. However,
consider this, without sentimentality, about Kennedy,
who was undoubtedly a member of the power elite, that
he was also a small fry in the power game who got aced
for rocking the boat, in some fashion we should be
curious to discover. He seems like a fat cat to us,
but he was a prole grubber to the hampton set. We
never quite see the invisible game, but here we see
rustling in the bushes.
CB: And now the bushes have come right out.
We should wonder why they
risked exposure just here.
CB: My hypothesis is that it was the military-industrial complex that Eisenhower named
for us, like Hobson named imperialism for us. The military industrial complex opposed
deescalation of the Cold War like chemical companies opposed telling workers that they
were being poisoned by vinyl chloride. The military industrial complex, the death
merchants of all times, murder incorporated for real could not abide 1)the Nuclear
Test Ban treaty that Kennedy signed with the Soviets a few months before he was killed
2) the result of the Cuban missile conflict by which the U.S. did not invade Cuba and
take out those pipsquicks on the inner core land mass of the empire, inside the US
practically, too close for comfort to tolerate. It was just too much of a chicken move
for the superaggressive theory of the U.S. warlord commanders. You can't show that
much weakness to your enemy. These two alone were enough to off that fucker Kennedy.
Then Kennedy had a woman who turned out to be a Soviet !
agent visiting him in the White House or thereabouts ? Come on . You don't think you
can be hit. We'll show you.
The point is that it isn't the government that did
this, but, precisely the point, the elites who are not
a part of the government
CB: Disagree. This was one sector of the government taking over another section of the
government. A coup d'etat. That _is_ the important point. U.S. "democracy" has
undemocracy. Elections and votes are not respected by the U.S. ruling class. It is a
major, widely known incident that refutes U.S. propaganda and imperialist
rationalization about the U.S. as a democratic system so it can go around the world
establishing "democracy" by force.
I found the reference I was thinking of, Vincent
Salandria, "The Warren Report", Liberation (1965).
Salandria, if I have the right reference, figured out
the whole thing almost immediately, perhaps before the
tide of propaganda descended on common sense. So this
piece in Nature is a bit late in the day. Also there
is a speech of Castro, almost the same week. He
understood right away what was going on.
More information about the Marxism