Mehmet Ali Agca and the JPII Assassination Attempt Revisited

Reagan-and-Pope-JP-II-660x350-1494382376

Dear Reader,

I am in the midst of Paul Kengor’s book A Pope and a President: John Paul II, Ronald Reagan, and the Extraordinary Untold Story of the 20th Century.  This book is very curious, for it tries to seize the message of Fatima and craft a purely 20th century narrative from it, i.e., the real message of Fatima is the struggle between the United States and her allies and the Soviet Union and there is no future chastisement to come. The book also seeks not only to canonize Ronald Reagan but even members of the Reagan family who were known for their irreligiousness.

There is much to say, but I want to focus on Kengor’s curious attempt to prove (once again) that the attempted assassin of John Paul II, Mehmet Ali Agca was working for Soviet intelligence and DEFINITELY NOT WESTERN INTELLIGENCE.

Kengor admits that (without saying so overtly) that Agca had all of the characteristics of a CIA operative, including:

  1. Unstable family life / and loner genius personality.
  2. Ties to fascism.
  3. Ties mafia in a NATO country.
  4. A mysterious jail break.
  5. Experience murdering.

However, Kengor explicitly ridicules the idea of the Central Intelligence Agency using a mafia linked criminal from a NATO country to perform an assassination: “It did not take long before both the Bulgarians and Soviets were contending that the CIA had tried to kill the pope. Yes, the CIA. Truly, nothing was beyond the communist propagandists.”  This is the typical post-Cold War neocon (and even neoliberal narrative): The Soviets believed that Agca was a right wing assassin because he sure looked like one, but, of course, the Soviets were a bunch of crazy, stupid liars who lost the Cold War, so everything they said was a lie.

Reader, let me leave you with some rhetorical questions.

  1.  Did the CIA ever employ a fascist mafia hitman from a NATO country to perform any criminal activity?
  2. Is it true that the Soviet intelligence and press were composed of the cartoonish bungling Keystone cops that neocons depict them as being?
  3. Is it is more likely that the attempted assassinations of John Paul and Ronald Reagan (by a friend of  the Bush family) have a CIA not a KGB link?
  4. Why does every neocon biographer of John Paul II go out of the way to try to prove the KGB assassination theory?
  5. Why doesn’t Kengor mention the ties between John Hinckley, the attempted assassin of president Reagan, and the Bush Family?

John Paul II and Ronald Reagan: Two Assassination Attempts with One Story?

John_Hinckley,_Jr__Mugshot.png

The term “conspiracy theory” famously was  developed  by the Central Intelligence Agency to label any story that deviated from the official narrative of the Kennedy assassination. However, the American people and the people of the world never have bought this lone gunman theory even as much we have come to associate the word “conspiracy” with mental illness and/or science fiction. The answer to who killed President Kennedy will never be definitively found because the very nature of espionage precludes an answer. The CIA is not an individual or even a corporation that makes corporate decisions, and the overlap among intelligence agencies, organized crime, cults, banking, and corporations is so complicated and vague as to provide a clear smoking gun. However, there are individuals who clearly were part of or at least knowledgeable of the Kennedy assassination, and there were individuals who were clearly not part of the Kennedy assassination.

I briefly want to visit the assassination attempt on John Paul II and its relationship to the attempt on President Reagan–two assassination attempts that also seem to provide more questions than answers. While reading John O’Sullivan’s sycophantic and ultimately vapid triple biography of John Paul II, Margaret Thatcher, and Ronald Reagan, The President, the Pope and the Prime Minister, I noticed something rather curious. All three people whom O’Sullivan among other neocons have paraded as the great emblems of true conservativism and the great crusade against communism had attempts on their life in relative chronological proximity to one another.

jp-ii

John Paul II was shot by Mehmet Ali Agca, a member of the Grey Wolves, a nationalistic crime syndicate, on May 13, 1981. The standard narrative is that John Paul II was miraculously saved from dying by Our Lady of Fatima from a “crazy” Turkish extremist who probably was operating on behalf of the KGB in some capacity. John Paul II was so terrifyingly hostile to the Soviet Union that the Soviets were willing to risk a third world war to get rid of him. This story does not meet the muster of analysis. First of all, John Paul II spent much of his life behind the iron curtain. Secondly, much of John Paul II’s early writings on economics were just as critical of communism as capitalism. This is not to say that John Paul did not aid in the downfall of the Soviet Union or that John Paul was necessarily supportive of the Soviet Union—although it has been suggested that the Soviets and the Polish Communist party did not really perceive him as a threat either because he was liberal enough or perhaps they knew something that the public has yet to find out. Finally, last time I checked, Turkey was a hotbed of NATO-CIA activity not KGB, and whenever you hear the word Turkish mafia, you should not think KGB, but rather CIA. So why would the CIA want to kill John Paul or send him a warning?

The assassination attempt on John Paul II was only six weeks apart from Ronald Reagan’s, which occurred on March 30, 1981 by John Hinckley Jr. whose father was close friends and partners with George H.W. Bush. The story of the Reagan assassination conspiracy has been told and retold over the internet—especially in the past couple of years, but I want to look at the motivating factor behind it as a foil to the John Paul II assassination. The driving factor was, of course, to bring the White House under the control of the Bush clan and eliminate any conservative policies of Reagan’s that would have gotten in the way of Bush’s New World Order that he trumpeted when he became president. Reagan certainly got the message, selling out our beautiful state of California in the 1986 amnesty deal that paved the way for the conquest of so much of our country. The neocons also gained tremendous ascendance in the Reagan white house, and, of course, abortion stayed safe and legal.

If the CIA or some appendage of the Anglo-American-Israeli player of the New World Order was behind the attempted assassination of John Paul II, it may be a clue to understanding JPII’s pontificate—especially if the motivation behind the assassination was to send a message to John Paul II (if not kill him outright). Let’s engage in some brief speculation.

One of the biggest obstacles to traditional Catholics embracing John Paul as a saint is the 1986 Assisi Prayer meeting. Not only were various heretical and non-Catholic sects encouraged to pray in unison, they were given space to pray to their false gods. This was one of the most critical events for ecumenism and religious dialogue and the preparation of a new world religion. All ecumenical and interreligious prayer events cite the Assisi meeting as a precedent. This idea of a world religion is clearly masonic and new age and has been the goal of the United Nations since its inception. Indeed, John Paul seemed sympathetic to the idea that all prayer (except for maybe explicit Satanists?) was prayer to the one true God, but maybe the assassination attempt gave him some extra motivation to help roll out the new world religion.

Another terrible blot on John Paul’s record is his gross negligence of the abuse scandal. John Paul repeatedly appointed bishops who were either sex offenders and/or covered for sex offenders, and there is evidence that John Paul was aware of the abuse crisis before matters reached a crescendo in 2002. Perhaps, John Paul was  pressured not crack down on abuse–especially if that crack down would implicate anyone in American intelligence or the Republican or Democratic parties in child abuse. Interestingly, as well, Fr. Marcel Maciel, a repeat abuser, told his mistress that he was “a spy.” Fr. Maciel was very close to John Paul.

Also, maybe John Paul was being pressured to be more anti-Soviet or at least anti-Soviet in the way American intelligence wanted him to be. This could explain his rendezvouses with Zgibniew Brzezinski as well as George Weigel’s desperate attempts to rule out any connect between John Paul and American intelligence. There was a clear channel of communication between American and John Paul II and the Solidarity movement. The only question is: Was it merely friends working together against a common enemy, or was there more going on?

In the end, I firmly believe that the story of John Paul II has not begun to be written. I do not believe it is clear that he was an active agent of evil so much as a liberal pope who was exceptionally intelligent and a very skilled actor. However, there are many, many unsolved mysteries around John Paul II’s life and work, and many of these mysteries involve American intelligence.