An interesting aspect of the military coup in Egypt Egypt United
States America America
Really? What about November
22, 1963 ?
“Oh, Jacob, don’t be silly. President Kennedy’s
assassination couldn’t have been orchestrated by the U.S. Egypt Chile Iran Guatemala South Vietnam U.S. CIA , but such a thing could
never happen here in our country.”
Oh, really? So, what you’re saying, Mr. Statist, is that if
the democratically elected president of the United States is engaged in
policies and actions that are leading to the nation’s destruction, the U.S.
national-security state apparatus — i.e., the Pentagon, the CIA ,
and the NSA — will simply stand aside and let it happen — despite the fact that
the U.S. military and the CIA have supported
and even participated in military coups that purportedly save foreign
countries from their rulers.
Consider Chile U.S. CIA
to foment a massive economic crisis within the country, much like the economic
crisis leading up to the military coup in Egypt CIA
faithfully obeys his orders notwithstanding the fact that the Constitution does
not authorize any such action. The Chilean military, with the support
of the U.S.
Pinochet’s military-intelligence goons immediately went
about arresting Allende’s supporters and suspected communists, jailed
them, tortured and raped them, and executed them. To this day, supporters of
the coup say that all this was justified to save the country from the mistake
that the Chilean electorate had made in electing Allende president.
The U.S. national-security state did its part by helping
to execute a young American mannamed Charles Horman, whose only
“crime” was having the same leftist leanings as, say, President Franklin
Roosevelt. (See “What Were the Standards for Executing Charles Horman?” by Jacob
G. Hornberger.) It was a cold-blooded murder of an innocent American, a murder
for which the still-unidentified CIA killers
have never been held to account, no doubt because the operation was conducted
in the name of “national security,” the two magical words that have
played the biggest role in the lives of the American people in our
lifetime.
Why wouldn’t that same mindset that was used to justify the
Chilean coup operate here in the United States U.S. Chile Chile United States United
States Chile America United
States
That’s patently ridiculous. It is the job of the
national-security branch of the U.S. CIA ,
and the NSA would help foreign militaries oust their rulers to save their
countries but would not do the same for the United States when faced with
similar circumstances makes no sense. After all, don’t national-security
statists often tell us that the Constitution isn’t a suicide pact?
So, certain questions naturally arise: Did President Kennedy
pose a threat to national security? Were his policies and actions leading America
From the standpoint of a national-security statist, there
really isn’t any question about it. In fact, looking at the situation through
the mindset of a national-security statist, what Kennedy was doing here in the
United States was infinitely worse than what Allende was doing in Chile, or
Mubarak and Morsi were doing in Egypt, or Mossadegh was doing in Iran, or
Arbenz was doing in Guatemala, or what Diem was doing in South Vietnam.
Consider Kennedy’s policies actions from the standpoint of
an ardent national-security statist at the height of the Cold War. Here’s how
an ardent national-security statist viewed Kennedy and his administration:
While Kennedy had talked a good game against the communists
during the 1960 presidential campaign, his policies and his actions left the United
States
1. During the Bay of Pigs disaster,
Kennedy double-crossed the CIA and the Cuban
exiles by refusing to provide them with air cover, thereby bringing failure and
shame to the United States Soviet
Union based nuclear weapons aimed at the United
States
2. While Kennedy publicly accepted responsibility for the Bay
of Pigs disaster, he privately blamed the fiasco on the CIA .
He fired the highly respected Alan Dulles as head of the CIA
(whom LBJ would later appoint to the Warren Commission, a conflict of interest
if there ever was one) and two of his main subordinates. Kennedy also went to
war against the CIA , promising “to splinter
the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter
it to the winds.” If the threatened destruction of the CIA
at the height of the Cold War wasn’t a grave threat to national security in and
of itself, what was?
3. After the Bay of Pigs , Kennedy refused
to approve Operation Northwoods, a top-secret military plan unanimously
recommended by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, whereby the U.S. Cuba Cuba
4. During the Cuban Missile Crisis, Kennedy refused to invade
or bomb the island, which is what the Pentagon and the CIA
wanted him to do. Instead, he showed weakness by negotiating with the
communists and, even worse, letting the Soviets and Cubans prevail in the
crisis by promising that the United States would never invade Cuba again,
leaving the communists with a permanent outpost 90 miles away from American
shores. Kennedy also secretly promised the Soviets that he would withdraw
nuclear missiles in Turkey Soviet Union .
(I would be remiss if I failed to mention that during the
Cuban Missile Crisis Bobby Kennedy communicated to the Soviets that President
Kennedy was faced with the distinct possibility of a U.S. Egypt America
5. No longer trusting the judgment of either the military
establishment or the CIA , JFK, who had
continued to oppose them by adamantly refusing to commit any combat troops to Vietnam U.S. CIA (and a lot of other Americans)
were convinced, the loss of Vietnam United States Vietnam
After the Cuban Missile Crisis, Kennedy entered into secret
negotiations with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev to do something much bigger
than simply get out of Vietnam Soviet Union and the United
States China United States
Needless to say, that was anathema to the military and the CIA .
Everyone knows that communists can’t be trusted. This was a formula for
surrender by an inexperienced, weak, and naive president.
(As an aside, I should point out that many U.S.
conservatives considered the fall of the Berlin Wall and the dismantling of the
Soviet Union to be an elaborate ruse by which the communists were lulling
America into a false sense of security. I personally recall one well-known
conservative who for years continued hewing to this position under the
assumption that communists could never be trusted.)
If the Cold War was ended, what would that mean for
America’s national-security state — i.e., the already enormous and ever-growing
military-industrial complex and the CIA ,
which former President Truman, only a month after the Kennedy assassination,
would observe had become, in the eyes of many around the world, a sinister
force?
6. Kennedy was supporting and defending Martin Luther King,
whom FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover was certain was a communist, and the
civil-rights movement, which Hoover
7. Kennedy was having sexual affairs with countless women,
including a girlfriend of a Mafioso and an erratic Hollywood
star, thereby subjecting himself and the country to the possibility of
blackmail. After all, if FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover could use personal
information about people’s sex lives to blackmail them, why couldn’t the
communists do the same? In fact, who’s to say that communist blackmail wasn’t
the reason that JFK was effectively surrendering America CIA about the
negotiations?
8. Circumstantial evidence suggests that Kennedy might well
have been smoking dope and possibly even taking LSD with one of his mistresses,
Mary Pinchot Meyer, the ex-wife of a high-level CIA
agent. What if the Soviets launched nuclear missiles at the United
States
Compare Kennedy’s actions to those of Morsi, or Allende, or
Arbenz, or Mossadegh, or Diem. What those rulers were doing to place their nations
in jeopardy pale to insignificance compared to Kennedy’s actions and policies.
Are we really supposed to believe that the U.S. United States United
States
For a deeper, fuller explanation of the context of Kennedy’s
relationship with the military and the CIA ,
especially after Kennedy’s soul-searing experience of the Cuban Missile Crisis,
I highly recommend two books: JFK and the Unspeakable by James W.
Douglass and volume 5 of Douglas P. Horne’s book Inside the
Assassination Records Review Board. (Volume 5 is Horne’s overview of why
Kennedy was assassinated. It is a gripping and fascinating expose of JFK’s
internal war, over foreign and military policy, against his own
national-security establishment.)Horne served on the staff of the ARRB, which
was formed in the 1990s in the wake of the storm of public opinion produced by
Oliver Stone’s movie JFK, especially the film’s revelation that the
federal government was continuing to keep records of the Kennedy assassination
secret from the American people.
Horne’s book mostly revolves around Kennedy’s autopsy, which
has always been sold to the American people as nothing more than negligence and
incompetence on the part of the military officials who performed the autopsy.
Oh?
Consider the following aspects of the autopsy, as detailed
in Horne’s five-volume book:
1. Two separate brain exams involving two separate
brains were conducted, one of which, to belabor the obvious, did not belong to
President Kennedy. The brain whose photograph made it into the official record
weighed more than a normal-size brain, notwithstanding the fact that most
everyone acknowledged that the gunshot to the president’s head had blasted out
approximately one-third of his brain tissue.
The official photographer for the autopsy, a federal
employee, ultimately swore under oath before the ARRB that none of the brain
photographs in the official collection (consisting of 14 photographs) were
taken by him and that none of the brain photographs that he did take are in the
official collection.
Moreover, an FBI agent who was at the autopsy also stated
under oath to the ARRB that the brain photos in the autopsy collection could
not be pictures of JFK’s brain because too much mass was present.
Are we to assume that that both the official photographer
and FBI agent were negligent and incompetent?
2. Many witnesses, including the Dallas
3. Many witnesses, including U.S. Bethesda Dallas
4. Two FBI agents who attended the autopsy wrote in their
official report that one of the Bethesda
5. Secret Service agents, brandishing guns and threatening
deadly force against the Dallas Parkland
Hospital Texas Texas
That’s just the tip of the iceberg. Horne’s five-volume
treatise is not an easy read but one thing is for sure: Anyone who
carefully reads this well-researched and detailed book can reach but one
conclusion: the autopsy performed by the U.S. national-security state on John
Kennedy’s body was a cover-up designed to cover up the fact that Kennedy had
been shot from the front.
And there’s an important point that no one has ever been
able to deny since the day of the assassination: The U.S. national-security
state had exclusive control over Kennedy’s autopsy. Not the Mafia. Not the
Soviets. Not Castro. Not aliens from outer space. Only the national-security
state had control over the autopsy and the resulting cover-up. There is no way
to escape that fact.
Is it just a coincidence that LBJ, himself an ardent Cold
Warrior, reversed what Kennedy was doing in foreign affairs, including his
secret negotiations to end the Cold War? Is it just a coincidence that the
military and the CIA got their war in Vietnam CIA , and the NSA and their
ever-increasing budgets? Is it just a coincidence that we’re still living under
the yoke of a Cold War national-security state notwithstanding the fact that
the Cold War ended almost a decade-and-a-half ago?
But hey, let’s just keep living our little myths and
deferring to the wisdom and authority of our beloved Cold War national-security
state, which suspends our freedom and privacy in order to keep us “safe” from
the threats of terrorism that it itself produces.
Let’s just keep believing that it’s only foreigners, not
Americans, who make “mistakes” in elections — mistakes that unfortunately
sometimes have to be rectified with coups and assassinations. While our
national-security state believes in helping foreign counterparts protect their
nations from bad rulers through coups and assassinations, let’s just keep telling
ourselves that it would never do the same here at home.
Reprinted from The Future of Freedom Foundation.
Jacob Hornberger [send
him mail] is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation.
Copyright © 2013 The
Future of Freedom Foundation
No comments:
Post a Comment