Jump to content
The Education Forum

Freeport Sulphur, the Castro Plots, and the Indonesia Coup


Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Cliff - who in your opinion orchestrated the assassination?

Averell Harriman with the blessing of John D. Rockefeller the 3rd.

Or so I'd speculate...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

18 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Good points.

Did you re-read Talbot's account of the Bay of Pigs?

What was the point of Dulles going to Puerto Rico and never showing up at Quarters Eye, the CIA's operational HQ in downtown DC?

He was acting?  For what purpose?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Did you re-read Talbot's account of the Bay of Pigs?

What was the point of Dulles going to Puerto Rico and never showing up at Quarters Eye, the CIA's operational HQ in downtown DC?

He was acting?  For what purpose?

What's your take on it? No I haven't reread it. Thanks for the reminder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Averell Harriman with the blessing of John D. Rockefeller the 3rd.

Or so I'd speculate...

Thanks for sharing. Eastern Establishment all the way. The word orchestrate, for a musician, means taking an idea and fleshing out the details. I doubt that was Harriman's role, if indeed he and Rockefeller were the top of the pyramid. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Thanks for sharing. Eastern Establishment all the way. The word orchestrate, for a musician, means taking an idea and fleshing out the details. I doubt that was Harriman's role, if indeed he and Rockefeller were the top of the pyramid. 

 

Okay, composer.

Harriman was the composer of the Kennedy assassination, I'd reckon.

Along the lines of the Diem coup, as per the Corson Scenario:

Joseph Trento, The Secret History of the CIA, pgs 334-5:

<quote on, emphasis added>

Who changed the coup into the murder of Diem, Nhu and a Catholic priest accompanying them? To this day, nothing has been found in government archives tying the killings to either John or Robert Kennedy. So how did the tools and talents developed by Bill Harvey for ZR/RIFLE and Operation MONGOOSE get exported to Vietnam? Kennedy immediately ordered (William R.) Corson to find out what had happened and who was responsible. The answer he came up with: “On instructions from Averell Harriman…. The orders that ended in the deaths of Diem and his brother originated with Harriman and were carried out by Henry Cabot Lodge’s own military assistant.”

Having served as ambassador to Moscow and governor of New York, W. Averell Harriman was in the middle of a long public career. In 1960, President-elect Kennedy appointed him ambassador-at-large, to operate “with the full confidence of the president and an intimate knowledge of all aspects of United States policy.” By 1963, according to Corson, Harriman was running “Vietnam without consulting the president or the attorney general.”

The president had begun to suspect that not everyone on his national security team was loyal. As Corson put it, “Kenny O’Donnell (JFK’s appointments secretary) was convinced that McGeorge Bundy, the national security advisor, was taking orders from Ambassador Averell Harriman and not the president. He was especially worried about Michael Forrestal, a young man on the White House staff who handled liaison on Vietnam with Harriman.”

At the heart of the murders was the sudden and strange recall of Sagon Station Chief Jocko Richardson and his replacement by a no-name team barely known to history. The key member was a Special Operations Army officer, John Michael Dunn, who took his orders, not from the normal CIA hierarchy but from Harriman and Forrestal.

According to Corson, “John Michael Dunn was known to be in touch with the coup plotters,” although Dunn’s role has never been made public. Corson believes that Richardson was removed so that Dunn, assigned to Ambassador Lodge for “special operations,” could act without hindrance.

<quote off>

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

What's your take on it? No I haven't reread it. Thanks for the reminder.

Allen Dulles and Charles Manson are two of the most over-rated villains of all time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Allen Dulles and Charles Manson are two of the most over-rated villains of all time.

I definitely don't agree with you on Dulles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

I definitely don't agree with you on Dulles.

That brings us back to the Bay of Pigs and the Kennedy assassination.

Taking a powder to Puerto Rico D-Day -1 was villainous in what respect?

Bailing on Quarters Eye on the D-Day evening was villainous in what respect?

Setting up friends of his girlfriend to host a "Presidential assassin" was villainous in what respect?

This is goofy stuff, frankly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My indictment of Dulles has nothing to do with his girlfriend's connection to the Paine family, though I think he steered questioning of Ruth away from exposure to that. I think he (and his brother, and Sullivan Cromwell) were at the center of US foreign policy for decades. That includes aiding Nazis during and after the War, destabilizing democratically elected governments like Iran and Guatemala, making sure that Italy and Greece did not follow suit. I think he saw JFK as an existential threat, and the feeling was surely mutual. I don't think the Dulles brothers operated in a vacuum. My guess is that we essentially agree on the essential fact that JFK was murdered by elements of the establishment. I agree with you that the illegal drug trade was part of this equation. I don't single it out as the overriding factor. Like you I have done lots of research on this, and I'm probably as cynical as you are when it comes to the nefarious activities that our military and intelligence engage in to finance their operations off the books (and make a buck). I just don't isolate drugs as the centerpiece, just an important one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

My indictment of Dulles has nothing to do with his girlfriend's connection to the Paine family, though I think he steered questioning of Ruth away from exposure to that.

Bingo! 

Why would Dulles set up friends of a friend as assassin-hosts when he'd have to face possible subsequent exposure?

The Paines-Bancroft-Dulles connection was much more consistent with a frame job than the work of a mastermind.

What mastermind opens themselves to such exposure?

Quote

I think he (and his brother, and Sullivan Cromwell) were at the center of US foreign policy for decades.

In Harriman's biography the Dulles brothers are referred to as "his lawyers."

I suspect Harriman protected Allen Dulles from the elites who sought his dismissal, most prominently Robert Lovett, Harriman's life-long best ally.

Harriman and Lovett were two of the six "Wise Men" at the center of US foreign policy for decades.

Many of those rogue CIA cowboys Lovett loathed were Harriman's drug gang shock troops.

Quote

 

That includes aiding Nazis during and after the War, destabilizing democratically elected goernments like Iran and Guatemala, making sure that Italy and Greece did not follow suit. I think he saw JFK as an existential threat, and the feeling was surely mutual.

"Existential threat" to Dulles?

How?

Seems to me having exposure to a "Presidential assassin" was more of an existential threat to Dulles than any chance of Kennedy pulling his pension.

Quote

I don't think the Dulles brothers operated in a vacuum.

Employees never do.

Quote

My guess is that we essentially agree on the essential fact that JFK was murdered by elements of the establishment.

I can't go so far as to call it a "fact."

I put it in the "Highly Likely Deserves Greater Scrutiny" category.

Quote

I agree with you that the illegal drug trade was part of this equation. I don't single it out as the overriding factor. Like you I have done lots of research on this, and I'm probably as cynical as you are when it comes to the nefarious activities that our military and intelligence engage in to finance their operations off the books (and make a buck). I just don't isolate drugs as the centerpiece, just an important one.

Don't forget the social engineering aspect of the post-WW2 drug trade targeting minority communities.

The Rockefeller/Harriman/Walker/Bush crime syndicate were big time eugenicists.

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Bingo! 

Why would Dulles set up friends of a friend as assassin-hosts when he'd have to face possible subsequent exposure?

The Paines-Bancroft-Dulles connection was much more consistent with a frame job than the work of a mastermind.

What mastermind opens themselves to such exposure?

 

I think I am seeing your point Cliff...

Strategic VS. Tactical. Especially at his age.

Cheers, Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Michael Clark said:

I think I am seeing your point Cliff...

Strategic VS. Tactical. Especially at his age.

Cheers, Michael

I don't think "the CIA" whacked Kennedy,

I think "the CIA" whacked Oswald.

Helms & Co knew that if the Garrison investigation went too far certain Agency guys like E. Howard Hunt would go down for the Kennedy assassination itself.

I speculate Allen Dulles was on that patsy chain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are we seeing an unwitting of sheep dipping of Dulles by way of the Paines? Is that his path to patsification, Like Oswald through Cubans with Fake Commie credentials?

So Dulles is, like Ruby, is forced to scramble-in for the cover-up?

Sorry for the questions. I'm Just thinking out loud. 

Recently my thinking has become more informed by the Philadelphia connection, as presented by Ashton Gray in the Liddy-Marathon oil thread; which, to me, is in large part about the Paines.

So I am also Hypothesizing a "Go" on the kill plan as coming from the Eastern Establishment, down, more or less directly to operators like Hunt (Ashton Gray points out the conspicuous absence of G Gordon Liddy through this period). The hit is carried-out without CIA top level sanctioning. 

How high does the cover-up go in the CIA, and at what points along the time-line?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

How high does the cover-up go in the CIA, and at what points along the time-line?

Per John Newman in "Oswald and the CIA" it has to go as high as J.J. Angleton, does he report to someone or is he a principal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Chris Newton said:

Per John Newman in "Oswald and the CIA" it has to go as high as J.J. Angleton, does he report to someone or is he a principal?

Sounds like a Principal to me.

Assuming a possible reading, largely informed by Mr. Varnell, but in no way implying that I understand my rendition as his, I am musing on the following.

Stratospere-level "Deciders" ( I'll just put Dulles at 35,000 feet, for arguments sake) get that job down to Hunt, and the likes. Algleton is bypassed and is the victim of a distraction campaign. On 11-22-63, he gets blindsided; and he can never admit to that.

Bang-zoom! 

JA is owned,; and the CIA can say that it was not a top-down operation.

????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...