JFK and the Unspeakable

[Mark Thibodeau]

All I have to say to y'all is read Carl Oglesby's epochal work The
Yankee Cowboy War (which I have as a text doc for anyone who wants it
- just email me and I'll send it along). It is a flawlessly argued and
utterly convincing portrait of the parapolitical American milieu in
which both the JFK assassination and Watergate took place, providing
SO much legitimate grist for the conspiratorial mill it will leave
your head spinning. Fans of Sidney Blumenthal's Rise of the
Counter-Establishment, take note... you're in for a shocking
plagiarism revelation. Sid's (very infulential) thesis was lifted
whole cloth from Oglesby's (far superior) observations and analysis
about the collapse of the post-war consensus and the rise of...
well... the counter-establishment, of course!

Cheers,
yer old pal Jerky



On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 10:50 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
> Tracy,
> Your moral judgements are faultless if applied in a world without prevailing
> gravity.  I'm sure you are well aware of the many cosmic and personal
> reasons that you are not now President of USA. You would probably really
> suck at that job.  So I suggest a little humility in judging the guy in
> there now.  He is black and in a huge seat of power amid deep seated racism,
> and where else in the world does he have an equal?
>
> On Monday, January 13, 2014, Joseph Tracy wrote:
>>
>> Iraq seems mostly a case of cutting  losses  , pretending something heroic
>> happened and leaving ourselves with a huge backdoor, which is more like a
>> front door, to control their oil.   ( We really can't keep spending money we
>> don't have even though we are America, Fuck Yea.)
>>
>> Gates' complaints are a ludicrous distraction from the obvious.  Obama
>> endorsed the policies of the Military, they failed miserably, both Obama and
>> the Military/Intel leaders are to blame for the war policies, for the NSA
>> assault on privacy, for the drone program, for their cost and their failure.
>>
>>  I honestly don't know how anyone can claim to have any realistic sense of
>> what Obama wants or stands for.   His actions and speeches have moved so
>> often in opposite directions and there is so little consistency and gumption
>> that I tend to think he is, as Naomi Klein describes, the current logo on
>> brand America, more of a sales job than a leader or even a person with core
>> values.
>>
>> Obama may be more than a pawn if one were to assign exact power ratios.
>> But the Military/Intel is where most of the money goes, generation after
>> generation and that is who has clearly been calling the shots.
>> On Jan 13, 2014, at 5:15 AM, Martha Rooster-Singh wrote:
>>
>> > What about the recent book by Gates? Gates was frustrated by Obama, the
>> > Vice President...others in the elected power structure of government. If the
>> > president is a pawn of the National Security State, he is a powerful pawn.
>> > Holds a key position in the center of the board. Maybe has reached the
>> > opponent's side and is now, in his second term, a knight? Why, if he is
>> > merely a pawn,  has Obama frustrated their efforts and the efforts of their
>> > elected supporters (John McCain) to force him to keep the wars going? Iraq,
>> > for example, is huge money maker of the NSS, but Obama is cutting it off.
>> > And, he is, slowly, ending their wars elsewhere as well. Not saying he has
>> > control, but he's seems more than a mere pawn in the game.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 1:36 AM, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
>> > Japan has faced its crimes far more deeply than the US. No one on the
>> > p-list has remotely rivaled Oliver Stones artistic output or skill though
>> > the JFK focus on Jim Garrison was a mistake. If  Stone was on the p-list I
>> > doubt he would be treated with dismissal. Anyway Jim Douglas is not  Oliver
>> > Stone and the book is worth reading. The problem is pretty fucking obvious
>> > and it isn't in ancient history. The president is a pawn played by the
>> > national security state. There's hole in big brother's arm where the money
>> > and the power goes and pretending won't make it go away.
>> >
>> > On Jan 12, 2014, at 6:56 PM, Rich wrote:
>> >
>> > > Japan hasn't really fessed up to the war. Ask the Chinese or the
>> > > Koreans
>> > >
>> > > Didn't realize we had Oliver Stone on the plist. You're smarter than
>> > > that man c'mon
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >> On Jan 12, 2014, at 5:52 PM, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> I disagree. It matters. It is about a point of departure, and it is
>> > >> precisely because there was this challenge to and defiance of the prevailing
>> > >> myth that it matters. It is critical that we have a line that can't be
>> > >> crossed and crimes that must be faced just as Germany and Japan have faced
>> > >> their crimes. Kennedy represents  a point where the peacemaking that is
>> > >> currently deemed by the dominant culture to be unspeakable became both
>> > >> speakable and persuasively refreshing. Kennedy was loved and the love was
>> > >> growing and changing the culture. His death was not a meaningless accident.
>> > >> Not a paranoid fantasy.  Even the most cursory look at the assassination
>> > >> unleashes a flood of official denial, lies, manipulations, and  non-credible
>> > >> coincidences that demand that we simply refuse the official story. The
>> > >> narrative which the CIA tried to erase returns again and again and all the
>> > >> evidence functions as an Occam's razor to point to the CIA as the center of
>> > >> a successful plot to shift power away from elected leaders to an empire of
>> > >> secretive alliances between military, industrial, resource extraction and
>> > >> investment forces. Civilian and democratic oversight died with Kennedy. The
>> > >> only challenge to that was Carter who was easily relegated to one term and
>> > >> was still the vector of Breszinski's tenure as manager of imperial agenda.
>> > >>
>> > >> When you speak of thought crimes you relegate yourself to a cage
>> > >> which only you have the lock or key for.
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>> On Jan 12, 2014, at 8:21 AM, Martha Rooster-Singh wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Douglas doesn't have to prove that the CIA killed JFK. It doesn't
>> > >>> much matter at this point. In fact, I question why bring the assassination
>> > >>> into it? It only muddies the waters.  The obvious reason is that he wants to
>> > >>> show us how we got to this point from 1960. If we agree with his assessment
>> > >>> of where things are and how things got to be as they are, the assassination
>> > >>> is only a distraction. The unspeakable now is not the assassinations. And
>> > >>> JFK's assassination, if you think the CIA killed him and the others, was
>> > >>> only one of several unspeakable murders. The unspeakable is not nuclear war
>> > >>> with the Soviets.  This is not 1960. But the counter to unspeakable violence
>> > >>> has not changed. Peace is still unspeakable. The kind of world JFK described
>> > >>> in the University Speech is, in 2014, unspeakable. It is a thought crime.
>> > >>> You can't even think it.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> On Sunday, January 12, 2014, Joseph Tracy wrote:
>> > >>> The reek of conspiracy is deep  and the obvious center is the CIA.
>> > >>> What becomes clear is why. And how they had so many allies or sympathizers
>> > >>> that they could be pretty certain they would get away with it.  The
>> > >>> continuous growth of the Military industrial complex and the power of
>> > >>> intelligence agencies along with the erosion of civil
-
Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l