Who was JFK?

[James DiEugenio]

Which McNamara did in May of 1963 at the Sec Def conference in Hawaii. The record of this meeting was finally declassified by the ARRB in 1997. It was a bombshell. So much so that it convinced the NY Times and Philadelphia Inquirer that Kennedy was planning to get out of Vietnam. I read the document closely and made it a front page story in Probe. ​On every page of the series McNamara and everyone else is clear that Kennedy wants to get out of Vietnam and turn the war over to the ARVN--sooner rather than later! (Destiny Betrayed, Second Edition, pgs. 366-67, I will return to the sooner rather than later part) That fall, JFK decided to activate the plan; but he did not trust his subordinates to carry it out as he wished. So before Taylor and McNamara got back from Saigon, he had Krulak rewrite their report with himself editing it. (Ibid, p. 367. Since Prouty worked with Krulak, this is how he found out about it.)

He then attached it to NSAM 263. He then rode herd on his cabinet to get on board this order, and for McNamara to announce it to the press. But as McNamara left to tell the media, Kennedy leaned out a window and said, "And tell them that means all of the helicopter pilots too." (Newman, p. 407)

​Now, as I said, I wish to return to the irritation McNamara showed in Hawali, when some commanders asked for more time in getting Americans out. As Newman points out, Kennedy used the false intel reports to ballast his withdrawal, knowing they were BS. (ibid, p. 410) What he was really worried about was that South Vietnam would fall too soon. In other words even before the withdrawal was completed. What would he do then?

​Well, just declassified last year at NARA was, I think, the last piece of proof one needs in this regard; and why we had to wait to the 21st century for it shows how the other side used secrecy to their advantage. Kennedy, in November of 1963, ordered an all inclusive evacuation plan for American personnel from South Vietnam. Why would he do that if he was staying?

Kennedy had made his choice: He was getting out, no matter what.

[James DiEugenio]

By the way, it is because of all this new information about Vietnam, which I think cinches the case, that I turned to these other areas.

Since, as I stated in the power point, I thought that the critical community was too focused on Vietnam and Cuba.

Kennedy's foreign policy was much wider and more sophisticated than that. And it was, I think, a pretty Gestalt concept. And it was formed by 1960.

Which is a dispute I have with JFK and the Unspeakable.

But my main point is, Kennedy's foreign policy reforms were more or less all overturned by LBJ and the CIA. And then hammered into the ground by Nixon and Kissinger. Which is why the late Jonathan Kwitny wrote his excellent book Endless Enemies.

The fact that this was so systematic and rigorous I believe is evidence of a high level plot. Since that fits the description of a coup d'etat.

One more point about Vietnam: in the book Virtual JFK, it is revealed that LBJ understood he was breaking with Kennedy on Vietnam. And he then tried to cover up that fact! And its on tape.

I mean, really, how much more do you need?

Edited July 22, 2015 by James DiEugenio

[James DiEugenio]

I cannot help but add one last thing about McCloy and Carter in the 1979 hostage crisis. From an upcoming article of mine:

"Before leaving the subject, its interesting to speculate on another possible aspect of the pressure campaign brought to bear on Carter to let the Shah into the United States. Everyone knows that John McCloy served on the Warren Commission. In May of 1979, Carter was visiting Los Angeles to make a speech at the Civic Center. He had still not allowed the Shah into the country. The police apprehended a man with a starter’s pistol in the crowd. When they questioned the suspect, he told the authorities he was part of a four man assassination team. His function was to fire a diversionary shot into the ground while the other members shot at Carter from a nearby hotel. Although the police were skeptical, they later found that a room at the hotel was rented by a man the suspect had named as part of the plot. In that room was a shotgun case and three spent rounds of ammunition. Further, the occupants had checked out the day of the assassination attempt. The apprehended suspect’s name was Raymond Lee Harvey. One of the men he named as a co-conspirator was Oswaldo Espinoza Ortiz. (Time, 5/21/79) About four months later, Carter admitted the Shah."

Coincidence?

[Len Colby]

Which McNamara did in May of 1963 at the Sec Def conference in Hawaii. The record of this meeting was finally declassified by the ARRB in 1997. It was a bombshell. So much so that it convinced the NY Times and Philadelphia Inquirer that Kennedy was planning to get out of Vietnam.

Jim we had some nasty dust ups in the past. But let's let that be water under the bridge, peace! Can you post links to the NYT and PI articles?

[James DiEugenio]

You can't find these eh?

How hard did you look?

NY Times Dec 23, 1997 by Tim Weiner.

[Ron Ecker]

I cannot help but add one last thing about McCloy and Carter in the 1979 hostage crisis. From an upcoming article of mine:

"Before leaving the subject, its interesting to speculate on another possible aspect of the pressure campaign brought to bear on Carter to let the Shah into the United States. Everyone knows that John McCloy served on the Warren Commission. In May of 1979, Carter was visiting Los Angeles to make a speech at the Civic Center. He had still not allowed the Shah into the country. The police apprehended a man with a starter’s pistol in the crowd. When they questioned the suspect, he told the authorities he was part of a four man assassination team. His function was to fire a diversionary shot into the ground while the other members shot at Carter from a nearby hotel. Although the police were skeptical, they later found that a room at the hotel was rented by a man the suspect had named as part of the plot. In that room was a shotgun case and three spent rounds of ammunition. Further, the occupants had checked out the day of the assassination attempt. The apprehended suspect’s name was Raymond Lee Harvey. One of the men he named as a co-conspirator was Oswaldo Espinoza Ortiz. (Time, 5/21/79) About four months later, Carter admitted the Shah."

Coincidence?

Not only that, but soon after this "assassination attempt" Carter signed off on arming the mujahadeen in Afghanistan, for what Brrrrzzzzzinski (sp) called "Russia's Vietnam."

[James DiEugenio]

That is correct.

Carter signed that in June, right after the Los Angeles incident.

[Robert Howard]

The threat Jim Di Eugenio mentioned did not go un-noticed here on the Forum, I updated it, for those who forgot about it.

[Brian Schmidt]

The late 70's/early 80's transition from Carter to Reagan is an important and understudied field linking JFK-era conspirators, IMO.

The assassination attempt on Carter is one piece of a much larger power grab involving the Iranian hostage crisis - Operation Eagle Claw, which I believe may have been sabotaged, the October Surprise - and possibly even the Reagan assassination attempt.

[Len Colby]

You can't find these eh?

How hard did you look?

NY Times Dec 23, 1997 by Tim Weiner.

I didn't look, one of the forum's rules is that posters are expected to provide citations for their claims and I imagined you had the links readily at hand. Your claim that "the NY Times and Philadelphia Inquirer that Kennedy was planning to get out of Vietnam," was NOT accurate. Not at least regarding the former. Or perhaps it's better to say your statement was misleading. I don't think this was intentional on your part, you seem too wedded to your pet theories to objectively evaluate the evidence.

From the NYT article you cited:

No one will ever know whether these plans would have been carried out had Kennedy lived. The United States had 16,300 advisers in South Vietnam at the time. By the end of 1968, it had more than 500,000 soldiers in the country.

Historians know that Kennedy directed the Pentagon to devise the withdrawal plans. But some believe they were a political facade erected for the 1964 elections; others think they were based on overly optimistic battlefield reports; still others see them as a device to force South Vietnam's corrupt Government to change.

[...]

Edited July 23, 2015 by Len Colby

[James DiEugenio]

The threat Jim Di Eugenio mentioned did not go un-noticed here on the Forum, I updated it, for those who forgot about it.

I assume you mean "thread"? Which one?

[Ron Ecker]

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=4667

[James DiEugenio]

Quoting excerpts from the records of the Sec Def Conference, that is a primary document not secondary spin:

Part IV: Withdrawal of US Forces:

"As a matter of urgency, a plan for withdrawal of about 1,000 US troops before the end of the year should be developed."

Part V: Phase out of US Forces

"SecDef advised that the phase out program presented during May 6 Conference appeared too slow. In consonance with Part 3, request you develop a revised plan to accomplish more rapid phase out of US Forces."

Comprehensive Plan: Republic of Vietnam

Item 2: Decision Made and Actions to be taken

1."Draw up training plans for the RVN that will permit US to start an earlier withdrawal of US personnel than proposed under the plan presented."

Item 3: Role of Attack AIrcraft

"Secdef stated the percentage of RVNAF effort was no greater than a year ago. Our sights should be higher and he wanted to get US pilots out of combat and transport operations."

Comprehensive Plan: Part 2, Force Structure

"At the same time, the Secretary stated that we should seek opportunities to leave our material behind for RVN to use wherever they can absorb it..."

Part C: Relations of Reductions in US Strength to Growth in Self Sufficiency

"In connection with this presentation...the Secretary of Defense stated that the phase out appears too slow. He directed that training plans be developed for the GVN by CINPAC which will permit a more rapid phase out..."

Edited July 23, 2015 by James DiEugenio

[Paul Brancato]

The NYT article speculates we will never know if JFK would have withdrawn troops from Vietnam, but I think we, with the benefit of decades of research, know beyond doubt that it was not electioneering or anything else but an honest desire to pursue a peaceful path.

[James DiEugenio]

http://www.nytimes.com/1997/12/23/us/kennedy-had-a-plan-for-early-exit-in-vietnam.html

Here is the whole article. Note the title.

Above, I have excerpted the actual document wording to show that there is no ambiguity about what the documents say. Its undeniable. When one is talking about leaving material behind for the RVN, I mean, give me a break.

Because of that, the Times had to headline it as they did. But because its the NY Times and Weiner, they had to then spin it in order to create a controversy which the documents do to not depict.

The most striking thing about them is the constant refrain by McNamara that the withdrawal had to be faster. I actually think this is traceable to what I talked about earlier. Namely that Kennedy was worried about getting out before South Vietnam fell.