Why Allen Dulles Killed the Kennedys

By now there’s not nearly as much disagreement regarding what happened to John and Robert Kennedy as major communications corporations would have you believe. While every researcher and author highlights different details, there isn’t any serious disagreement among, say, Jim Douglass’ JFK and the Unspeakable, Howard Hunt’s deathbed confession, and David Talbot’s new The Devil’s Chessboard.

Jon Schwarz says The Devil’s Chessboard confirms that “your darkest suspicions about how the world operates are likely an underestimate. Yes, there is an amorphous group of unelected corporate lawyers, bankers, and intelligence and military officials who form an American ‘deep state,’ setting real limits on the rare politicians who ever try to get out of line.”

For those of us who were already convinced of that up to our eyeballs, Talbot’s book is still one of the best I’ve seen on the Dulles brothers and one of the best I’ve seen on the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Where it differs from Douglass’ book, I think, is not so much in the evidence it relates or the conclusions it draws, but in providing an additional motivation for the crime.

JFK and the Unspeakable depicts Kennedy as getting in the way of the violence that Allen Dulles and gang wished to engage in abroad. He wouldn’t fight Cuba or the Soviet Union or Vietnam or East Germany or independence movements in Africa. He wanted disarmament and peace. He was talking cooperatively with Khrushchev, as Eisenhower had tried prior to the U2-shootdown sabotage. The CIA was overthrowing governments in Iran, Guatemala, the Congo, Vietnam, and around the world. Kennedy was getting in the way.

The Devil’s Chessboard depicts Kennedy, in addition, as himself being the sort of leader the CIA was in the habit of overthrowing in those foreign capitals. Kennedy had made enemies of bankers and industrialists. He was working to shrink oil profits by closing tax loopholes, including the “oil depletion allowance.” He was permitting the political left in Italy to participate in power, outraging the extreme right in Italy, the U.S., and the CIA. He aggressively went after steel corporations and prevented their price hikes. This was the sort of behavior that could get you overthrown if you lived in one of those countries with a U.S. embassy in it.

Yes, Kennedy wanted to eliminate or drastically weaken and rename the CIA. Yes he threw Dulles and some of his gang out the door. Yes he refused to launch World War III over Cuba or Berlin or anything else. Yes he had the generals and warmongers against him, but he also had Wall Street against him.

Of course “politicians who ever try to get out of line” are now, as then, but more effectively now, handled first by the media. If the media can stop them or some other maneuver can stop them (character assassination, blackmail, distraction, removal from power) then violence isn’t required.

The fact that Kennedy resembled a coup target, not just a protector of other targets, would be bad news for someone like Senator Bernie Sanders if he ever got past the media, the “super delegates,” and the sell-out organizations to seriously threaten to take the White House. A candidate who accepts the war machine to a great extent and resembles Kennedy not at all on questions of peace, but who takes on Wall Street with the passion it deserves, could place himself as much in the cross-hairs of the deep state as a Jeremy Corbyn who takes on both capital and killing.

Accounts of the escapades of Allen Dulles, and the dozen or more partners in crime whose names crop up beside his decade after decade, illustrate the power of a permanent plutocracy, but also the power of particular individuals to shape it. What if Allen Dulles and Winston Churchill and others like them hadn’t worked to start the Cold War even before World War II was over? What if Dulles hadn’t collaborated with Nazis and the U.S. military hadn’t recruited and imported so many of them into its ranks? What if Dulles hadn’t worked to hide information about the holocaust while it was underway? What if Dulles hadn’t betrayed Roosevelt and Russia to make a separate U.S. peace with Germany in Italy?  What if Dulles hadn’t begun sabotaging democracy in Europe immediately and empowering former Nazis in Germany? What if Dulles hadn’t turned the CIA into a secret lawless army and death squad? What if Dulles hadn’t worked to end Iran’s democracy, or Guatemala’s? What if Dulles’ CIA hadn’t developed torture, rendition, human experimentation, and murder as routine policies? What if Eisenhower had been permitted to talk with Khrushchev? What if Dulles hadn’t tried to overthrow the President of France? What if Dulles had been “checked” or “balanced” ever so slightly by the media or Congress or the courts along the way?

These are tougher questions than “What if there had been no Lee Harvey Oswald?” The answer to that is, “There would have been another guy very similar to serve the same purpose, just as there had been in the earlier attempt on JFK in Chicago. But “What if there had been no Allen Dulles?” looms large enough to suggest the possible answer that we would all be better off, less militarized, less secretive, less xenophobic. And that suggests that the deep state is not uniform and not unstoppable. Talbot’s powerful history is a contribution to the effort to stop it.

I hope Talbot speaks about his book in Virginia, after which he might stop saying that Williamsburg and the CIA’s “farm” are in “Northern Virginia.” Hasn’t Northern Virginia got enough to be ashamed of without that?

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.
  • mulga mumblebrain

    No way. No Allen Dulles would have just meant another Allen Dulles, and he didn’t work alone, did he? There would have been a Dick Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ash Carter, Armitage, Wolfowitz, Macnamara or John Foster Dulles. The US elite are EVIL, all the way from top to bottom.

  • diogenes

    Thank you David Swanson.

    A key and telling fact is, who were the Dulleses? Where did they come from, socio-economically? Who was their “clan,” their “crew”? What group did they spring from and serve. Like their grandpa Foster, Sect. of State under Benjamin Harrison, the Dulleses were Wall Street finance corporate lawyers to the core. The law firm in which they were partners was the firm JP Morgan used to write the incorporation of US Steel and dozens of other central corporate entities of the American plutocracy whose headquarters is, … Wall Street.

    • tom

      Interestingly enough, the Dulles family was also (or portrayed itself as) intensely religious. But it was a special kind of religion – a fervent Protestantism that abhorred Catholicism almost as much as atheism. Thus the brothers were able to put themselves at the head of a virtual crusade against “evil”, usually identified with “communism”, while ordering the most despicably evil acts. One suspects that what they were most fundamentally scared of was that the communists would come to America, take away their power, wealth, and privilege, and share it all out among the “common” people.

      • diogenes

        The “religion” is windowdressing. The Wall Street headquarters is the revealing point. Why obscure it with reference to window dressing? What’s the motive here, one wonders.

        • mulga mumblebrain

          Many of that type of Protestant are fervent ‘Christian Zionists’, who even pre-dated Jewish Zionism of the Herzl kind by centuries. The earliest I know of was Cromwell, Oliver that is. The US elite inherited the fancy from their English progenitures that they were the New Chosen People, the Covenant with God having passed from Jews, to ‘Britons’ to ‘Americans’.

    • hyperbola

      Why not say clearly who the deep state really is and represents. Kennedy was the third president they assassinated (plus two more assassination attempts and an attempted coup).

      A Historical Perspective: The Banking Monopoly
      https://criminalbankingmonopoly.wordpress.com/author/stackjones/

      Its NOT new. The sect has been enslaving countries and sending their population off to die in wars that favor their “business” for a long time.

      The Jewish Opium Trade and Britain
      http://satyricon20.tripod.com/sat33-Sassoon.htm

      The Charge Of The Light Brigade: What Can American Military Personnel Learn?
      https://vidrebel.wordpress.com/2012/01/04/the-charge-of-the-light-brigade-what-can-american-military-personnel-learn/

      Nowadays their political lackeys in “our” government also protect their corruption and abuse.

      Gangster bankers too big to jail
      http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/gangster-bankers-too-big-to-jail-20130214

      and, not only their narcotrafficking abuses.

      Monsanto Protection Act: A Post-Mortem for Our Legal System
      http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article34482.htm

      • Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley and Kennedy – and Jackson who survived – were the ones offed by the banksters.

    • nick quinlan

      And, Wall Street lawyers created the evil entity which is the CIA.

  • awb22

    Jimmy Carter was the last best POTUS this country ever had, and he was the last one to attempt to take on the bureaucrats in Washington. These bureaucrats are 4th and 5th generations going to Ivy League schools and serving as civil servants at the highest echelons with unlimited budgets. Plenty of opportunity for the devil to work in the most powerful county the world has ever known. We all know the track record of the US federal government. One need only look to the plight of the American Indian during the 18th and 19th century and fast forward to a global monopoly on power brokered by the same men mentioned in this article.

    I don’t know anything about Bernie Sanders besides what I read in the MM, which isn’t a lot, but then, I didn’t know anything about Ron Paul 8 years ago, and voted for him in the 2012 primaries. Given that OWS and the Tea Party have been usurped by the respective national parties, and both movements are anti-status quo, my opinion is they should join forces. Also, considering there is little difference at the end of the day, between the republican and democrat parties, that they play both sides against the middle, if Trump and Sanders had an ounce of humility between them, they would both quit their party and run on a split ticket.

    That’s the only way either one of them will win. I could get behind a Trump/Sanders ticket in 2016, as I’m sure most of you can. How about it? Anyone have any contacts in these camps to get this done?

  • Eol Awki

    “And that suggests that the deep state is not uniform and not unstoppable.”

    Or it suggests the opposite – that the Deep State was powerful enough to bring down presidents, and it still is.

  • November 13, 2015 The Deep State: The unelected shadow government is here to stay

    “Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government, owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people.”―Theodore Roosevelt

    America’s next president will inherit more than a bitterly divided nation teetering on the brink of financial catastrophe when he or she assumes office. He will also inherit a shadow government, one that is fully operational and staffed by unelected officials who are, in essence, running the country.

    http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/16829#sthash.xSkzm6mG.dpuf

  • Don Wills

    I’m reading The Devil’s Chessboard now. Everybody who cares about their future should read it. It’s about a whole lot more than just the Kennedy assassinations – the book is essentially the history of the military industrial complex.

    • goingnowherefast

      I’m reading it now as well and concur with your recommendation.

    • Watcher

      Read The Devils Chessboard a few weeks ago. Dulles was the most despicably behaved creature I’ve ever read or heard about – ever, not even the Hitlers and Stalins of the world stooped so low. Everyone should be required to read this book.
      The pathetic thing is that millions are still happy to believe the Oswald narrative, along with the 19 hijackers narrative, both of which were/are plain lies.

  • Steven

    The vast potential productivity of the industrialised world, particularly in the engineering and chemical
    industries, must find an outlet. If that outlet is by financial folly denied it in the building up and reconstruction of the home-life of nations, it remains as a direct and powerful incentive to the fomenting of war.

    Frederick Soddy, WEALTH, VIRTUAL WEALTH AND DEBT, 2nd edition, p. 303

    If the 99% don’t stand up for themselves soon, as a species we are doomed. The world – and
    particularly the so-called ‘industrial democracies’ has yet to come to terms with the consequences of the industrial revolution and in the U.S. the ‘closing of the Frontier’ (the successful conclusion of its genocidal campaign against the country’s indigenous population?) It should come as no surprise that a single-minded focus on reducing the cost of labor or eliminating it entirely – and these days off-shoring – would produce what Marx called a “reserve army of labor” or what Kissinger reputedly labeled
    “useless eaters”.

    If for the 99% the only purpose in life is making money for others as CH Smith seems to imply in a recent posting – http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/11/super-welfare-guaranteed-income-for-all-isnt-a-solution-its-just-the-new-serfdom.html – then the bloody history of the 20th century makes perfect
    sense: why even attempt a ‘leisure society’ where, victory in the struggle for subsistence having been won, all those remotely interested in finding a purpose for their lives beyond making money are told ‘(s)he who does not work, neither shall (s)he eat’. Or as Smith phrases it:
    This is why “super welfare” guaranteed work for all is just a new version of Socioeconomic Hell. Being paid to do nothing does not provide meaningful work or positive social roles, which are the sources of positive identity, pride, purpose, community and meaning.

    Southern plantation owners must have had their own version
    of this when asked about the possibility of freeing their slaves. He goes on to bemoan the abstraction of:

    The petit-bourgeois fantasy of every individual flowering as an artist, musician and creator once freed of work … born of the expansion of academic enclaves and private wealth-funded dilettantes fluttering from one salon to the next.

    I will grant Smith the concession that not all of us (i.e. the 99%) are interested in contemplating the meaning of life. So for them as well as the philosophers among us the “guaranteed work for
    all” could consist of enough education in the basics of the science and technology that sustains us to at
    least know what butters their bread. Above that the 99% requires at least a basic grasp of real economics – POLITICAL economics – not the sterile version bought and paid for by the 1% and
    disseminated by their employees in academia and the MSM. (See Michael Hudson’s Killing the Host)

    But back to issues of war and peace. Perhaps rather than allow the bulk of the 99% to dissipate their lives in a mindless cycle of meaningless consumption the 1% should change that reserve army of labor into a real army – and use that army to cement its control over the world and its wealth to the nth generation, to bring about “the end of history”?

    Smith asks:
    “Ever notice how many trust-funders have therapists? Would they all need therapists if being freed from work automatically generated happiness and fulfillment?” So maybe the 1% should be required to perform some “guaranteed work for all” as well.
    Maybe the trust fund babies, like Proudon, have an intuitive understanding that Proudhon “Property is theft.” See Hudson’s forthcoming book J is for Junk Economics: a Survivor’s Dictionary to the Vocabulary of Deception (possibly coming out under another title); that Balzac’s insight (that) ‘Behind every great fortune lies a great crime,’ does not apply in their case (i.e. that their ancestors came by the fortunes they enjoy ‘honestly’ by arranging for advances in human knowledge to be incorporated in the struggle for subsistence.

    • mulga mumblebrain

      With the onset of computerisation, automation and robotisation, the ruling elite no longer have any need for the 99%. They don’t need their labour, and they don’t need their consumption. More and more they will make money out of thin air, speculation and rentier extractions, plus ubiquitous fraud. Forty years of stagnating wages, eviscerated conditions, ever more precarious employment, and accelerating inequality tells you that the elite have no restraint, because any capitalist that is not a psychotic predator will be out-competed by those who are Capitalism selects for human psychopathy.
      With the 99% being immiserated, they only pose a threat, not any opportunities. So, psychopaths being psychopaths, and the elite INCESSANTLY chattering on about population reduction and eugenics, I think we can easily guess at what the near future will bring.

  • bondo

    swanson blows it with the BS holocaust

  • Brockland A.T.

    Those ‘what if’ questions are interesting. Its likely that in the absence of a healthy elite culture, if not Dulles than someone else would usurp his place, just like there wold have been another Oswald-like dupe had Oswald not been there.

    Being at the top of the hierarchy comes with the price of being trapped there and being unable to do anything else but what it takes to stay on top and being very good at that to the exclusion of anything else. Then, its so much easier to destroy than create and build.