The Assassination / The medium is the message
SebPer
Welcome. You suggest the assassination was a coup d'etat. That it intended a message of limits on the power of the elected president vis-a-vis a power elite. It's execution was public, blatant, brutal and unmistakable.
The best summation of the thesis to date, in my view and that of many, is James Douglass, JFK and the Unspeakable: Why he died and why it matters.
Here is an introductory excerpt:
http://www.maryknollsocietymall.org/chapters/978-1-57075-755-6.pdfThe excerpt is 54 pages, the text of the book, 400, followed by 100 pages of fascinating notes.
Douglass posits JFK was “soon marked out for assassination†for his serial obstruction of the aims of the security state, e.g., Bay of Pigs, missile crisis, test ban treaty, detente with Khruschev, and National Security Action Memorandum 263, his codified intention to withdraw from Vietnam rather than commit combat troops.
JFK had made enemies of powerful men as indicated in Marrs' Crossfire, namely, LBJ, Hoover, Dulles and the CIA, the Pentagon, the mob, namely Marcello, Giancana, Hoffa, oil men, namely Murchison and Hunt, others including racist opponents of civil rights.
Robert presents the case for Marcello as the sole major figure to confess responsibility.
There are many facets explored by a league of researchers determined to uncover the truth.
Your premise is sound, the gravity and enormity of the conspiracy, crossfire and coverup far surpass the simple requirements of a contract murder—it was a symbol of the shadow government's power.
The leader of the Free World is shot dead in a Texas street at high noon as the world watches in horror.
Is it not fascinating that the following year the Soviets replaced the peace-seeking Khruschev with the Cold Warrior Brezhnev, even as LBJ the hawk concocted the Tonkin Gulf Resolution as pretext for a profitable war.
Access to the heroin of the Golden Triangle cannot be excluded from motives: Luciano used by U.S. intelligence, his man Lansky working the trade through Cuba, failing that route they turn to Southeast Asia and nothing stands in their way.
Your instincts are correct: the demands of power always threaten its democratic restraint.
That is the tension of history.