A New and Improved Irish Jesus

By Melody Clark

The Bush Cadre's Fight to Destroy the Iconic Kennedy Legacy and Replace it with Ronald Reagan's
The Grand Poobah of political humor sites, the Onion, once featured a plea to Barbra Streisand from the fictional Collector's Plate Society. "The Society" beseeched Babs to voluntarily die young so that they could better merchandise her. It had been years since Presley, they pointed out, and the collectibles world needed another tragic early death of a celebrity legend.

I am reminded of the Onion whenever I look at the carefully cultivated mythology that has sprung up around Ronald Reagan.

Ten years after Cape Canaveral was renamed Cape Kennedy, the Kennedy name was stripped away and the cape renamed Canaveral. JFK's name was deliberately and methodically tainted and turned into fodder for bad gossip columns and movie magazines while Ronald Reagan was hyped up into more-than-movie-star proportions. JFK (and his family) were the "bad Irish". Ronald Reagan was the "good Irish".

I really would like to know why it is so blessed important which American President is popular in Ireland. I've always found it deeply fascinating why the American President's opinions on Northern Ireland are so central to discussions. What should Ireland care about an American President, beyond the normal familial ties we have with Ireland in return? He/she is our problem to deal with, but yet it always seems to come down to the US President passing muster with the Irish or they with him.

During the 60s, Irish homes proudly displayed portraits of Jack Kennedy. In the 90s, those portraits were removed in favor of Ronald Reagan. He would be the conservative JFK. A pro-Royal Irish President.

A previous piece of mine opined on the assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan. I also gave my opinion that the attempt might have been engineered by the one with most to gain from Reagan's fall -- his Vice President George Herbert Walker Bush. The attempted assassination was carried out by John Hinckley, an old friend of the Bush family. (An excellent novelized account of the overall hand of Bush in these matters can be found in Nathaniel Blumberg's The Afternoon of March 30th)

The usual explanation for this odd convergence include "the Bushes know a lot of people" and "Hinckley was drawn to the act by virtue of his father's relationship with the Bush family", etc. These are the very kind of articles of plausible deniability put forth by CIA white papers while also being potential explanations for the weird coincidence.

Another point often made is that "certainly the Bush family would have hidden any connection", had there been one. Would they have? And what if that connection was divulged? Especially if Reagan died and members of his own people smelled a Brutus among them? Wouldn't it have been far better for there to be an obvious "oh, it's just a coincidence" connection that the press could then easily ignore?

Oh, yes, we've already looked at that. Nothing to see here, carry on.

Had this been a run-of-the-mill murder with a suspect connected to someone who stood to gain greatly from the murder, on whose doorstep would detectives have been within hours of the shooting? It's the old legal question again ... for whom is it good? George Herbert Walker Bush would have been a strong suspect for a co-conspirator and yet he was never investigated. No one even followed up the leads on Hinckley despite the fact that Vice President Bush's son Neil was scheduled to have dinner with John Hinckley's father the very next night.

It's also well-known that Nancy Reagan spent the night at her husband's bedside, fearful that another assault on her husband was imminent, and yet John Hinckley Jr, the ostensible lone nut, was nowhere in sight. Who did Nancy fear? What did she know that we don't know? Only Nancy Reagan knows and she can't tell us.

If Reagan had died, there would have been their little "conservative" JFK all ready for an orchestrated veneration.

George Bush could then come in with unquestioned carte blanche to launch the attack his son took up because Reagan had the temerity to not die. One can imagine that Cape Canaveral might even have been re-christened Cape Ronald Reagan.

Who are these faceless people pulling strings? The late political researcher Mae Brussell (who was definitely stone paranoid but who came up with some amazing revelations in her time -- including breaking the Watergate story) called the US-based group "The Gang of 10". This was a band of young men in Texas who despised Kennedy and who called him, a full year before Kennedy's death, "the late Jack Kennedy".

Who else was involved? We know now, thanks to the death bed declaration of E. Howard Hunt that he was not only a key player in Watergate but also in the JFK Assassination. What? You haven't heard about that? Small wonder -- it made it to Rolling Stone and a handful of edge-oriented radio shows and that is it. Hunt confessed to helping to kill JFK. There was a conspiracy. We have it in his own spoken word tape given to his son who has made the tape public.

Who else was involved? He names a number of people including Lyndon Johnson. Johnson moved in the same circles as the Gang of 10, however George Herbert Walker Bush was its hub. Hunt himself was quite proud of helping murder Kennedy whom he saw as a traitor.

Let us then finally do away with any notion that our country is a democracy. It's a potentially great democracy which has become the focus of a tug of war between two divergent sides who have turned it, alternately, into a huge bureaucracy being attacked from within by corporate fascists.

One thing is certain, whomever stood behind them, Kennedy and Reagan at least meant well. They may have had divergent political opinions but there is no doubt that they had given up much of their lives to public service for their country. Reagan was not a conservative any more than Poppy Bush is, but he was closer to the mark than the warmonger radical we now have in office.

These are the illusions we are given for the puppetmasters to hide behind. Democracy by Muppetry and we're all in the audience.

Poor Jack never saw it coming. Jack who really had a higher, better vision so therefore was deeply threatening to the stone-cold sociopaths that are in control of half this country.

Reagan couldn't have seen it coming either. Happily, though, Nancy had some inkling. She kept her vigil by his bedside through the night.

The men behind this learned their lesson from the JFK assassination. Fewer people = fewer mouths to talk somewhere down the line. They couldn't have predicted the internet in 1963. They couldn't foresee generations of researchers, books and movies.

If this theory is true, the Gang of Ten clearly forsook the uber-conspiracy in favor of a carefully-seeded true lone nut. Reagan, happily, had one paid assassin who got off a bad shot. He also was much healthier than I expect they gave him credit. Heaven knows they rode around long enough with him in the limo, as if waiting for him to die -- so much so that the ambulance that left well after the speeding limo arrived at the hospital a good deal earlier than the President's limo.

If only poor Jack Kennedy had had an equal amount of good fortune. Kennedy had little time to accomplish what he had planned.

Reagan, on the other hand, sunk us into catastrophic debt. He made us a true debtor nation. And yet Europe (especially the UK) seemed to rally around him while other parts of it sought to tear him down.

Thus, we see the tug of war.

Communist conspiracy? Probably. Fascist conspiracy? The proof is evident.

But really, these two extremes serve the same master -- authoritarianism. Perhaps all along, these two "ends" were working toward one goal. In essence, the return of aristocracy. Were it not for the fact the blue bloods would surely mettle in our own land and the lands of family and friends, should we be seen as having too much fun, I'd say we should let these Alpha primates rule the world, if it is so vital to them. They've been dying to take it over since the democratic commoners model ascended to superpower status. Perhaps the US could then arrive at a truly populist US which embraces BOTH the simple human rights of its people as well as well-regulated open markets. Aristocrats can rule the world, for all I care, but with the evidence of hundreds of years of their murdering their own and launching enemies into famine and civil war, they don't seem to have a better track record than the democratic commoners.

Death being the great equalizer, both Jack and Ronald now rest in the arms of all knowledge. One can only hope they're somewhere pulling strings for all of us still stuck on the big blue rock.



Authors Website: http://populists.net

Authors Bio: I am self-employed as a writer and internet traffic consultant. I have a degree in cultural anthropology. I've been married for thirty years to my college sweetheart. We have one son. My family has been in the USA for 350 years. I take right-wing incursions personally.

http://www.opednews.com