>>> Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> 06/11/99 12:17PM >>>
Charles Brown wrote:
>More specifically, this thread is on secret police in the U.S. and the
>idea is that it was elite U.S.secret police operations that assassinated
>the Kennedys It was a coup d'etat by one part of the ruling class against
>another
Far from proved, to put it mildly. Have you been watching a lot of Oliver Stone movies?
(((((((((((
Charles: Do you think the U.S. has political police or not ?
Do you believe the lone gunman theory ? If it was a plot, do you think none of the other conspirators have been found by the government investigation ?
Actually I have never seen the movie JFK. I hypothesized this before that movie came out. But it really is kind of obvious. "Hypothesis"is too strong a word. It is no stretch that there were other conspirators. Only a secret police conspiracy would not be uncovered. Who could kill the president and not be uncovered ? The whole Garrison saga makes it clear that very powerful people thwarted full investigation;.
Guess what ? It will never be "proved". When I say these police are secret, I don't mean they aren't good at it. Do you think they are going to leave around proof ? Why do you think Lee Harvey Oswald never went to trial ?
As to RFK, the lone gunman model is too hoaky again.
What non-governmental agents/agencies do you think killed them ?
By the way, do you think that Oswald was not an agent ? Surely you are familiar with some of his biography. This guy was a Marine sharpshooter with a Russian wife. Seems he may have been doing some overseas work. Then he was handing out "communist" leaflets in New Orleans. He has a lot of earmarks of a special agent. Of course, by definition it is hard to _prove_ that he was an agent. He was also the fall guy in this one.
Also, never proved will be secret police assassinations of Martin Luther King or Malcolm X. In fact, almost all police assassinations will not be publically proven.
Again, are you really maintaining that the U.S. does not have political police ?
((((((((((((((((
This whole scenario depends on the belief that JFK was somehow not a good imperialist. But he was a rabid anti-Communist who campaigned on the fraudulent missile gap; to the Kennedys, Ike wasn't a sufficiently aggressive imperialist. He cut taxes on rich people; supply-siders revere him as a pioneer.
Charles: So you think it was anti-imperialists who killed JFK ?
I would say Kennedy started out ok for the right, but moved too liberal for the military industrial complex. He was going to sign a Test Ban Treaty with the Soviets. The Bay of Pigs failure and the Cuba crisis moved Kennedy toward treaties rather than confrontation with the Soviets. He was moving towards Civil Rights legislation. The New Frontier was not popular among right wingers. I actually think some on the right, the American values crowd of the day, were concerned about the cultural impact of Kennedy's liberal life style setting a radical example for youth. The 60's countercultural revolution was gestated in part in the White House Camelot. Not that Kennedy was on the 60's extreme, but as a role model, he opened the doors some, hanging with Marilyn Monroe and the Rat Pack may seem tamed today, but not then. It is analogous to why today's rightwingers hate Clinton's "culture". He was setting a bad example for youth, and in fact it had some effect making the countercultural rebellion. We all have some familiarity with the Goldwater line of the day. So I am sure you know that Kennedy was not considered right wing among right wingers of the Pentagon stripe.
We have a fact. JFK was killed. You reject my hypothesis , but offer no better one. You seem stuck with a lone nut ( the official version) or somebody from the anti-imperialist/left-center. That doesn't seem very plausible, especially that the government would not have uncovered the latter. Basically my reasoning is a process of elimination. Who with the wherewithal had some motive. It's like detective work.
((((((((((((((((((
What about Nixon? Did the CIA depose him, as John Ehrlichman and Kevin Phillips say?
((((((((((((((((
Charles: I don't have a definite opinion on Nixon. Of course, he wasn't assassinated. The move on Nixon takes no more explanation than the move on Clinton. Somebody in a place to get some information who didn't like him. But it doesn't have as much police smell to it. Could be. That would just be another secret police action.
I don't think the attempt on Reagan was rightwing secret police. That was a lone gunman, frustrated youth ( who had some contact with a neo-fascist group). He was a friend of the Bushes. So this was a rightwing family fight.
The main point is that there is enough evidence of secret and other political police actions in the U.S. to say that socialism is not characterized by more political or secret police than the U.S.
Charles Brown