Search - JEvents
Search - Categories
Search - Contacts
Search - Content
Search - News Feeds
Search - Web Links
Search - SunBay
Search - JComments
Thursday, 26 January 2017 14:54


Written by
Rate this item
(0 votes)

Jack Kennedy, now just who was he? A knight? Did America ever have those?

Ask anyone you encounter on the sidewalk, in the office or restaurant, “who was Jack Kennedy”, and the majority will likely tell you “I don’t know”. Some might offer that he was one of the famous Kennedy family, maybe even a brother to John. How many at this point know how many Kennedy brothers there were, or their names? Of course many past the age of 50 will remember many details, but the majority of people in this country now are not 50 or better.
Those who do recall our last American knight will know that he also went by the formal name of John. John F. Kennedy. JFK. His life has become mythic at this point, and like almost all myth created by contemporary media as a distraction, its details have largely been forgotten by a populace with a soundbite attention span. America does have myth. We are rich in it.
Long ago (over 50 years), but not far away, there existed in America a mythic place called Camelot. That is what the culture producers and myth makers called it, though the average person might have had little idea of what the reference might have been to. Camelot, a land of knights and ladies and bravery and crusades. Jack and Jackie certainly filled the role as knight and lady, powerful and regal, and Jack was completely the brave crusader. He gave his life for the crusade, your crusade. What crusade, you ask? Let’s look.
Jack’s crusade began with his resistance to the globalist push to involve America in the invented conflict in Vietnam (Jack had war experience having served in the Navy Reserve in WWII). If we remember the Vietnam war at this point, then we should also remember that the invented “Gulf of Tonkin” event that was used to accelerate American involvement in the conflict did not actually happen (better still, who remembers the “Pentagon Papers”?). A brief history lesson:
In the Yalta agreements secretly reached during WWII, it was determined that the US sphere of influence was to be Southeast Asia. The French had other ideas, and resumed their influence in what was called “French Indochina”, placing American ambitions on hold. Ho Chi Minh, after living in France and being influenced by different “socialist” groups, whom were influenced by Illuminati and Freemason philosophy, spoke before the Warburg brothers and other participants of the Versailles Peace Conference promoting greater rights in Indochina. In 1930 he founded the Vietnamese Communist Party, which the Soviets convinced him to change to a more generic Indochinese Communist Party, sounding more international. Ho was a nationalist though, and in 1941 he entered Vietnam with others and created the Viet Minh (League for the Independence of Vietnam). When the Japanese invaded in 1945, Ho and General Giap worked with the American OSS (Office of Strategic Services) to resist. He received American aid long after the end of WWII. In October of 1945 de Gaulle of France ordered French troops into Vietnam, hoping to head off American ambitions in the region. Ho refused French offers of assistance, insisting on independence. In May of 1954 Ho and his General Giap finally defeated the French at Dien Bien Phu and forced them out. The French then backed the deposed emperor Bao Dai, forcing the division of Vietnam into North and South, with Ho being ceded control of the North, which he accepted the promise of the Geneva Accords of a vote on reunification--- the accords which were not signed by the US. The South, which contained most of the wealth and resources of Vietnam, came to be headed by Ngo Dinh Diem, a Catholic in a nation that was 95% Buddhist. Diem had lived in the US after the French withdrawal, and was cultivated by high-ranking officials and CFR members. Diem was supported by Col. Edward Lansdale, the head of the first military “advisors” (a recurring theme to this day) sent to aid the Vietnamese National Army (234,000 men). The Diem government, backed by the US, postponed indefinitely any vote on reunification. Journalist Michael McClear wrote, “All this suggests that the U.S. conspired against the Geneva terms…”. Civil war was all but guaranteed. Increasing violence prompted the assignment of more American “advisors”, a move not authorized by Congress. China and Russia supplied the North, while the South came to rely on the US. The stage was set. In 1954 Senator John F. Kennedy stated, “No amount of American military assistance in Indochina can conquer an enemy which is everywhere and at the same time nowhere, an ‘enemy of the people’ which has the sympathy and covert support of the people”. He sensed where this would lead.
By 1963, then-President Kennedy was the biggest obstruction to the ambitions of the military-industrial complex that Eisenhower had so notably warned against, with Kennedy’s doubts about any greater involvement of the US in Vietnam. He would be overruled. His Special Advisor Galbraith stated, “Those of who worked for the Kennedy election were tolerated in the government for that reason and had a say, but foreign policy was still with the Council on Foreign Relations people.” The preponderance of CFR members in government led Kennedy to say, similarly to Reagan later, “I’d like to have some new faces here, but all I get is the same old ones.” It still operates that way today.
Kennedy would not accept being manipulated by others unelected. University of Pittsburgh Professor Donald Gibson wrote in his 1994 book “Battling Wall Street: The Kennedy Presidency”, “In fact the Establishment’s rejection of Kennedy became increasingly intense during his time in office.” Economist Seymour Harris called Kennedy “by far the most knowledgeable President of all time in the general area of economics… (w)hat he tried to do with everything from global investment patterns to tax breaks for individuals was to reshape laws and policies so that the power of property and the search for profit would not end up destroying rather than creating economic prosperity for the country.” In 1962 he made American steel corporations reverse price hikes. They resisted by freezing wages. He ordered his brother, Bobby, the Attorney General to begin a price-fixing investigation. They backed down. Not surprisingly, the board members of U.S. Steel, which had long been dominated by Morgan factions, featured many CFR members. He increasingly opposed the Federal Reserve by supporting greater investment and lending authority in independent banks, to the point of underwriting state and local bonds. He further authorized (take notice, all liberty-minded people) the issuing of over $4 billion in “United States Notes” by the U.S. Treasury (which has the only Constitutional authority to issue US currency), not the Fed. He meant to reduce the national debt by ceasing to pay interest to the Fed bankers, whom loan their private currency to the government at interest.
Think Trump is suggesting anything new? Kennedy offered tax incentives to return foreign investments made by US companies. Distinguished tax differences between productive and nonproductive investments, which would curtail tax havens and dodges. Remove any tax advantages for US-based global investment firms. He backed proposals to remove tax privileges for the rich. He advocated more taxes upon the larger oil companies (whom are controlled by the Rockefellers and Morgans to this day, whom largely control the banks). He wanted to rewrite the investment tax credit. He was continually attacked by the Rockefellers and the Wall Street Journal. Kennedy regularly opposed intervention in the internal affairs of other nations. By late in 1963 the US had more than 15,000 troops in Vietnam. Before that, Kennedy had grave doubts after the Bay of Pigs operation in 1961, doubting the reports from the CIA and the Pentagon. In October of 1963 Kennedy signed National Security Action Memo 263, which could have had the US out of Vietnam at the end of 1965, also requiring an initial reduction of military personnel during 1963. He rejected entering Laos, refuting many powerful people in the Pentagon and Congress (including many CFR members like Rusk, McNamara and the Bundys). He told Senator Mansfield that he had planned on “a complete withdrawal from Vietnam”, but could not do it before being given a mandate with reelection. He was deprived of a referendum from the people. Most people today who are even aware of it doubt the official story of his death. To that end, no less than Oswald’s wife, in a 1994 interview with A. J. Weberman, said, “The answer to the Kennedy assassination is with the Federal Reserve Bank. Don’t underestimate that. It’s wrong to blame it on Angleton and the CIA per se only. This is only one finger of the same hand. The people who supply the money are above the CIA.”
How far back we might have to go to find a comparison is debatable, but certainly in the last century-and-a-half or more, the American people have never had a greater champion, a brave knight fighting for their cause even, in the White House than Jack Kennedy. John or JFK if you choose.

Read 1488 times

Add comment

Security code


digital version