Trojan Horse by Downwithtyrannyblogspot
I am not a proponent of conspiracy theories per say. Yet when the facts simply do not add up and the official explanations make no sense, you're left to sift the sands of possibilities. Conspiracy has always been the way of mankind, we are those violent, vile, little monkeys with a thirst for blood. The conspirators slew Julius Caesar not because they did not love Caesar, but that they loved Rome more.
In the conspirators desire to save Rome from an all powerful Caesar they instead destabilized Rome and sent it into decline. I sometimes think that mankind's epitaph will be. "Too smart for their own good and not half as smart as they imagined."
In November of 1963 President Kennedy was a assassinated while riding in an open car. The official theory was that he was murdered by a lone nut with a rifle, a very bad rifle with a misaligned scope. A suspect with ties to intelligence groups and a very dark and murky background. The best evidence for conspiracy is not the murder its self but the actions after the murder.
The chief of the Dallas police declares the suspect guilty. The suspect is interrogated without an attorney present, and no one kept notes. The suspect is then murdered while in police custody. The inconsistencies are glaring and make no sense, the President's autopsy is handled by doctors who are bureaucrats and key pieces of evidence quietly disappear forever.
President Kennedy's murder was a pivotal turning point in American history. It changed everything, just as Caesar's murder changed everything in Rome. With a bullet the will of the American people was overturned.
To the American right wing, especially the extreme right wing, Kennedy was too soft on the Soviets. They complained bitterly of Kennedy's refusal to allow American air power to be used at the Bay of Pigs invasion. The President complained to his brother that he felt that he was being manipulated into starting a war. The right wing saw Kennedy's negotiations with the Soviets during the Cuban missiles crisis as a capitulation. History has proven Kennedy correct as the conflict could have very easily gone nuclear. Soviet Submarines had the weapons on station and authorization to use them if attacked.
They killed Kennedy not because they did not love him, but that they loved America more.
So we had the escalation of the Vietnam war and our new policy was to get tough with the Soviets. Martin Luther King had helped to lead the Montgomery bus boycott and had become a national leader on civil rights. He faced death threats almost daily, but at the same time King was known to be non-violent and open to accommodation. He was a pragmatic man willing to take the long road, while his contemporary Malcolm X was not nearly so pragmatic. Malcolm said things that scared the bejesus out of white America. He was a man of character and principle, unyielding and incorruptible. When he split from the Black Muslims over the character and corruption of its leader Elijah Mohamed, Malcolm was a marked man. He was seen as a threat to both the Black Muslims and to White America.
When Malcolm was murdered in 1965 was it a conspiracy? Of course it was, but were the FBI or CIA involved? They were involved only in the negative, if something you want to happen, is about to happen, then you just let it happen. Could the FBI claim they had no intelligence about the actions of the Black Muslims?
When Martin Luther King was murdered he had gone to Memphis to support striking sanitation workers. He was still involved in championing the rights of African Americans but his message was changing. He was no longer speaking exclusively for African Americans, he was speaking for all poor Americans and he had begun to speak out against the Vietnam war.
"Since I am a preacher by calling, I suppose it is not surprising that I have seven major reasons for bringing Vietnam into the field of my moral vision. There is at the outset a very obvious and almost facile connection between the war in Vietnam and the struggle I, and others, have been waging in America. A few years ago there was a shining moment in that struggle. It seemed as if there was a real promise of hope for the poor -- both black and white -- through the poverty program. There were experiments, hopes, new beginnings. Then came the buildup in Vietnam, and I watched this program broken and eviscerated, as if it were some idle political plaything of a society gone mad on war, and I knew that America would never invest the necessary funds or energies in rehabilitation of its poor so long as adventures like Vietnam continued to draw men and skills and money like some demonic destructive suction tube. So, I was increasingly compelled to see the war as an enemy of the poor and to attack it as such."
Martin Luther King spoke these words one year to the day before his murder. Murdered by yet another lone nut with a gun. An unemployed man with a new car, a man who claimed he was given money to go buy a rifle and was then ordered to take it back and to exchange it.
In 1968 political firebrand George Wallace ran for president as a Democrat and garnered a great deal of support from disaffected Democratic voters angry about civil rights and liberal policies. In 1972 Wallace ran again, this time as an independent, his policies were conservative and he threatened to take more votes from the Republicans than the Democrats. Wallace was shot and nearly killed by yet another lone nut with a gun.
This on the heels of Robert Kennedy's murder in 1968. Robert Kennedy had just won the California primary, it would have been difficult to have stopped him from becoming the Democratic nominee. A Democratic nominee with a cache, carrying a torch for peace. To complete his fallen brother's vision and to some, that vision was very, very dangerous. Machiavelli wrote, "But when cities or countries are accustomed to live under a prince, and his family is exterminated, they, being on the one hand accustomed to obey and on the other hand not having the old prince, cannot agree in making one from amongst themselves, and they do not know how to govern themselves."
"And he who becomes master of a city accustomed to freedom and does not destroy it, may expect to be destroyed by it, for in rebellion it has always the watch-word of liberty and its ancient privileges as a rallying point, which neither time nor benefits will ever cause it to forget."