Chasing shadows amid the seven veils

In response to the “Does the NSA target JFK websites?” post we had many compelling comments.

Anthony Martin writes:

“’Treason doth never prosper: what’s the reason? Why if it prospered none dare call it treason.’ (Sir John Harrington, 1561–1612). Contrary to the opinion of Mr. Sunstein: The worship of a state apparatus is not the moral equivalent of honoring the bargain between a free people and a representative government.

“Aside from the Constitutional issues of privacy and the identification of, the targeting of , and the suppression of dissident opinion; a centralized security information collection agency, such as the NSA, is subject to the following failings: 1) Abuse of power by an individual, e.g. J.E. Hoover; 2) Abuse of power by the institution itself,e.g. the CIA, 3) Infiltration by an agent of a foreign power, e.g. ala Kim Philby, and 4) Internal corruption for profit, e.g. the selling of information by an individual for monetary gain.

“The mere suggestion that the Executive Branch would use the NSA to manipulate public opinion and suppress free inquiry is a compelling reason for the necessity of sites like this. An examination of the JFK assassination, by its nature, causes one to seek a better understanding of the ramifications of a government acting in secret. This, even if there never comes about a once and for all solution to the aforementioned crime.”

But PBR cautions:

“Rather than waste ones time chasing shadows it may be wiser to challenge opposing views in the comments section with facts. Rather than, ‘Know thine enemy’ it would seem to be a case of  ‘Know thy facts.’ That’s the only surefire way to insulate oneself from any Machiavellian tricksters. Self induced paranoia is a distraction and an intellectual debility. Should the odd agent provocateur raise it’s head, so be it. There can be no fallout from civil debate and the application of logic.”

And John Kirsch concludes:

“In my view, the whole debate on this post is an example of what I would call the ‘dance of the seven veils.’

“That was a term I used as a reporter when I found myself covering politicians who spoke a great deal in order to conceal the truth.

“In this case, the truth, the 500-pound gorilla in the room that no one wants to acknowledge, is that America, the nation we once thought was a democracy, albeit flawed, is morphing (or perhaps, already has morphed) into something akin to a police state.

“As the economic status of many Americans has plummeted, their civil liberties, what we used to think of as their ‘rights,’ are being stripped away as well.

“What’s taking shape is a kind of corporate feudalism where former citizens will have no economic security or rights. One of the major reasons why they will be unable to correct this situation is because they will be subject to constant surveillance.

“The official reason for the surveillance will be to ‘protect’ Americans from something called ‘terrorism.’ The real reason will be to protect the rulers from their subjects.

Debating the fine points of the situation (who are they watching? Is this necessary?) misses the point: mass surveillance is a permanent condition and will become more invasive over time.”

 

5 comments

  1. Brian H says:

    One needs to be informed and ask questions about what’s going on in the world around them complacency is the enemy of true freedom and civil rights!

  2. John Kirsch says:

    The point I was trying to make in the comment included in the post is that Americans have not reached the point where they are able to actually see the truth of their situation. Perhaps predicament, and a very dire one, indeed, would be a better word to use than a neutral word such as situation.
    Americans like to think of themselves as hard-headed realists. In fact, their minds are full of illusions. I imagine that people in other countries also allow their minds to be filled with fantasies but the process seems to have reached a particularly virulent stage in the U.S., probably because of the pervasive influence of TV, movies and other forms of pop culture.
    That situation, Americans having their minds filled with fantasies and illusions, has dire implications for other countries because the U.S. remains the world’s only superpower, albeit one in decline. What Americans think is important, whether the rest of the world likes it or not.
    I am not the first to have seen how deluded Americans are, and how indifferent to the interests of other nations. Perhaps the experience of living in another, very different country, has allowed me to see my native country in ways that would otherwise have been hidden from me.
    To bring all this to a point, I would say that there is little chance of uncovering the truth of 11/22 until Americans stop thinking of themselves as an “exceptional” people who are somehow exempt from the types of misbehavior that elites indulge in in other countries.
    The only way exceptionalism could make any sense is if could be scientifically shown that Americans are somehow intrinsically different from people elsewhere. Since the very idea of such a scientific finding is ridiculous, the only conclusion is that exceptionalism is merely an assertion without basis in fact.

    • Mike Rago says:

      The “research” community will do all it can to keep people off the true scent. Oswald , the CIA provide plenty of shadows to chase.

      The truth of what is happened is simple, has always been right before us.

      The “research” community is an illusion. It’s entire purpose is to ensure that the truth does not come out.

      Chasing “Oswalds”, I mean shadows….

      • PBR says:

        I must confess to being somewhat baffled by these claims. ‘The truth of what has happened is simple.’? If only.

  3. Mike Rago says:

    Oswald was always to be known, he was the fall guy. Ruby had to step out of the shadows. Ruby was never to have been known. Therefore, Ruby shows us something that we were not supposed to know about the assassination. Ruby is a link that we were never supposed to know.

    The HSCA concluded that Ruby probably lied when he said that he did not know Oswald.

    “Based on its analysis of the charts themselves, and not considering the negative factors affecting the veracity of the examination, the panel could not form an opinion that Ruby told the truth when answering “No” to the four relevant questions asked in test series 1 and 2.On the contrary, the panel found more indications that Ruby was lying in response to these four questions?

    http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol8/html/HSCA_Vol8_0111b.htm

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

In seeking to expand the range of informed debate about the events of 1963 and its aftermath, JFKFacts.org welcomes comments that are factual, engaging, and civil. more