02-04-2018, 05:28 PM
Regarding the status of Eugene B Dinkin. I think that Dinkin could have gotten his information about the upcoming JFK assassination just as he said, i.e. from reading and analyzing published material. I also think that he could have gotten the information from his duties as a cryptographer. Finally, I think he could have just heard a rumor that was circulating around his base or office. Others may have known what he did and may have given him the information, but he would have been the only one brave enough to try and stop the assassination.
Regarding Metz, France, it is important to know something about Metz. Metz was the eastern terminus of the United States "communication corridor" which was a long narrow supply route which led from the Atlantic Ocean eastward and ended in Metz. It was used for logistics in support of US troops in Europe.
Importantly, the supply route was owned and operated by the US Army. Unlike combat troops, the supply zone would remain in US control even if war broke out. If war broke out, the combat troops and aircraft would be put under NATO command. But not so for the supply corridor.
Thus, Dinkin had nothing to fear if he offended the NATO commanders above him in rank. They would have no authority over him, even in training exercises. NATO did take control of US soldiers during training exercises, which were not that frequent.
Also, it is noteworthy that when Dinkin desperately went and told his story to the press, he did it in Switzerland and Luxembourg. As far as I know, neither of these countries was part of NATO. In his whistleblowing, he was apparently trying to avoid encountering NATO commanders. This backs up the theory that NATO was totally on board with the assassination, and it may have done more. The JFK assassination may have officially been a mission of NATO complete with a code name, etc. etc.
In his whistleblowing accusations, Dinkin named not only "military interests" but also "right-wing economic interests." Since he had the actual date of the assassination in advance, he must also have had in his mind the actual "right-wing economic interests" who he blamed. By specifying ECONOMIC interests, he was excluding mere right-wing organizations like the OAS, the KKK and so forth. They were not economic interests. Economic interests would have to be people like the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers, IG Farben, Deutsche-Bank, Dillon, Read, Texas Oil Barons, or such people.
Implicitly, it would be European economic interests since Dinkin found out about the assassination over in Europe. Since Dinkin died around 2010, its unlikely that we will ever know exactly what he knew or how he knew it, unless he told a relative or left notes somewhere before he died.
James Lateer
Regarding Metz, France, it is important to know something about Metz. Metz was the eastern terminus of the United States "communication corridor" which was a long narrow supply route which led from the Atlantic Ocean eastward and ended in Metz. It was used for logistics in support of US troops in Europe.
Importantly, the supply route was owned and operated by the US Army. Unlike combat troops, the supply zone would remain in US control even if war broke out. If war broke out, the combat troops and aircraft would be put under NATO command. But not so for the supply corridor.
Thus, Dinkin had nothing to fear if he offended the NATO commanders above him in rank. They would have no authority over him, even in training exercises. NATO did take control of US soldiers during training exercises, which were not that frequent.
Also, it is noteworthy that when Dinkin desperately went and told his story to the press, he did it in Switzerland and Luxembourg. As far as I know, neither of these countries was part of NATO. In his whistleblowing, he was apparently trying to avoid encountering NATO commanders. This backs up the theory that NATO was totally on board with the assassination, and it may have done more. The JFK assassination may have officially been a mission of NATO complete with a code name, etc. etc.
In his whistleblowing accusations, Dinkin named not only "military interests" but also "right-wing economic interests." Since he had the actual date of the assassination in advance, he must also have had in his mind the actual "right-wing economic interests" who he blamed. By specifying ECONOMIC interests, he was excluding mere right-wing organizations like the OAS, the KKK and so forth. They were not economic interests. Economic interests would have to be people like the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers, IG Farben, Deutsche-Bank, Dillon, Read, Texas Oil Barons, or such people.
Implicitly, it would be European economic interests since Dinkin found out about the assassination over in Europe. Since Dinkin died around 2010, its unlikely that we will ever know exactly what he knew or how he knew it, unless he told a relative or left notes somewhere before he died.
James Lateer