Ultimate Sacrifice by Thom Hartmann & Lamar Waldron

[Pat Speer]

I have a bit of a problem with those people who think the Kennedys were planning another invasion: At the same time I have no doubt they were hoping to provoke an uprising that would create the conditions for an invasion under Mongoose, or the subsequent covert program - and particularly the Artime autonomous group which operating from Costa Rica and Nicaragua. [Despite what some accounts say was code-named Second Naval Guerrilla, both Rafael Quintero, Artime's deputy, and Sam Halpern, executive assistant to Desmond Fitzgerald, the head of the Cuba task force at the time, both told me they never heard of.]

As I recall, Gus Russo's book, Live by The Sword, also claims - as I recall without going back to look for it - that Kennedy was planning another invasion, coming to that conclusion by selectively citing from a declassified document by Robert McNamara.

Don, we're of like minds on this issue. In Shackley's memoirs, he backs this up, claiming that they were trying to use Artime to foster an uprising in Cuba, and not pull a second invasion. I can see no upside for the Kennedys, politically speaking, to plan a second invasion for late 63, when they had the Russians signing nuclear test bans, and secret negotiations planned for Castro. It would have made no sense.

[Tim Gratz]

Well, Pat, what about the planned assassination of Castro by Dr. Cubela?

And how does the test ban treaty have anything to do with Cuba?

Edited November 12, 2005 by Tim Gratz

[Pat Speer]

Well, Pat, what about the planned assassination of Castro by Dr. Cubela?

And how does the test ban treaty have anything to do with Cuba?

Tim, cite one piece of NON-RUSSO derived evidence that the Kennedys knew about the Cubela Op. They didn't know about it, and almost certainly wouldn't have approved.

And the test ban treaty had EVERYTHING to do with Cuba, in that it signalled a warming in the cold war. A second invasion would have been at cross-purposes with the Kennedy Administration's goals. If you fail to see this, you need glasses.

[James Richards]

This clipping below comes from April of 1963.

James

[Tim Gratz]

Pat, I fail to see what difference it makes who discovered the evidence.

I believe it was Russo who discovered the item in the RFK phone log that logged a phone call between Fitzgerald and RFK on the same day that CIA HQ in Langley was informed that Dr. Cubela was requesting a personal meeting with RFK. Unless you argue that Russo somehow added that item to the phone logs when he was examining them, it makes no difference that it was Russo who discovered the log entry, does it?

There is also the testimony of a CIA operative that he personally delivered to the WH CIA verbiage to insert in the JFK speech to the IAPA. Again, what does it matter if the CIA agent first told that to Russo or to Joe Schmoe? The agent is either lying or telling the truth. To whom he made the stateement is irrelevant.

And we know that RFK participated in a meeting of the Special Group that approved massive sabotage operations against Cuba to commence the week-end before the assassination. Those sabotage operations, directed by the CIA, were clearly acts of war. How do you reconcile those activities with your supposed "warming of the cold war"?

And do not forget that we were fighting a Soviet ally in Vietnam as well as one in Cuba. There is nothing that says that we could not fight the Soviets on several fronts and yet agree with them for the good of mankind that nuclear weapons ought not be tested above-ground.

To determine the merits of the claim made in the book about a second invasion planned for December of 1963 I suppose we need to examine the book.

[Pat Speer]

Tim, one of the keys to understanding this mess that you seem not to grasp rests in the wording of both the state department's statements in the article printed by James and in JFK's speech in Miami. In both instances the Kennedy administration was adamant that having a Soviet Satellite 90 miles from our shores was unacceptable. This was a veiled olive branch to Castro--"if you dump the Russkies, we'll leave you alone and maybe even make it worth your while.' By all reports, by 1963, Castro, who loved American baseball, was ready to play ball. He didn't particularly like the Russians and knew that the long-term safety of his country could only come through peace with the U.S. I believe that JFK's offering Castro this opening resulted in his death.

Those Batistiano rats and their American mob allies that Hemming complains so much about were not about to let JFK sell them out again.

As for Russo, I don't particularly believe anything he says. I don't remember. Does he print this log book in his book? or are we just supposed to trust him?

As far as Cubela, since Helms and others never considered it an overt assassination plot, but as an opening to a potential replacement for Castro, it only makes sense that it was presented to the Kennedys in this manner. If there was a phrase inserted into Kennedy's speech, it could very well have been done without his knowing that an assassination attempt could follow.

Edited November 13, 2005 by Pat Speer

[Tim Gratz]

Pat wrote:

As far as Cubela, since Helms and others never considered it an overt assassination plot, but as an opening to a potential replacement for Castro,

You believe Helms? If so, you must be alone among assassination researchers in believing him about this. Why did Sanchez deliver to Dr. Cubela a CIA rigged Papermate poison pen? It was not for writing!

Pat wrote:

By all reports, by 1963, Castro, who loved American baseball, was ready to play ball.

By all reports? Not according to several Castro biographers. Remember his Sept 7, 1963 speech promising retaliation against American leaders if US efforts to kill him continued. By the way, do you remember the date that Cubela approached the CIA and said he would kill Castro for us?

Castro wanted to play "ball" with us?

This is called hardball. The US pitched quite a hardball at Castro but he hit it right back at us, with tragic results.

Edited November 12, 2005 by Tim Gratz

[Tim Carroll]

There is also the testimony of a CIA operative that he personally delivered to the WH CIA verbiage to insert in the JFK speech to the IAPA. Again, what does it matter if the CIA agent first told that to Russo or to Joe Schmoe? The agent is either lying or telling the truth. To whom he made the stateement is irrelevant.

Tim, one of the keys to understanding this mess that you seem not to grasp rests in the wording of both the state department's statements in the article printed by James and in JFK's speech in Miami.

Arthur Schlesinger remembers the wording of the Miami speech differently:

"A search of the JFK Papers shows that Goodwin, Ralph Dungan, Bundy, Gordon Chase of Bundy's staff and I were involved in discussions about the speech. No evidence was uncovered of any contribution from FitzGerald and the CIA."

Tim Carroll

[Dawn Meredith]

Well I had thought about trying to talk Barr and Billy Sol into an arm wrestling match at the authors tables but perhaps this is all getting too confrontational.

Larry, I know this is just a bit of humor, but Barr is not going to be there is he? Last I heard ( a few weeks ago) he was not going to be at any of the conferences.

I was hoping to get to Dallas for the weekend, but my work schedule got too intense. I have a slim hope of trying to make it, but it's not looking good at the moment. I REALLY wanted to see Joan, and a host of others.

I also really wanted to meet John!! So am still trying to find a way to fit it in. (Tho I have to be in court on the 18th and a lot of other stuff doing on....)

Dawn

[Gerry Hemming]

Well I had thought about trying to talk Barr and Billy Sol into an arm wrestling match at the authors tables but perhaps this is all getting too confrontational.

Larry, I know this is just a bit of humor, but Barr is not going to be there is he? Last I heard ( a few weeks ago) he was not going to be at any of the conferences.

I was hoping to get to Dallas for the weekend, but my work schedule got too intense. I have a slim hope of trying to make it, but it's not looking good at the moment. I REALLY wanted to see Joan, and a host of others.

I also really wanted to meet John!! So am still trying to find a way to fit it in. (Tho I have to be in court on the 18th and a lot of other stuff doing on....)

Dawn

---------------------

Hi Martha. Hi Rocky, Elvis and little Jean Morrison. Did you bake those cookies today ?? I just got a new recipe off of the Oprah Winfrey Show -- And she got it from Ellen Degenerate !!

WHAT THE #&^@#! IS THIS -- A *@$^@ CHAT ROOM ??!! Can't you folks use private e-mails for this "chatter" ?? Or can't you tell there are some serious and hard working real researchers here ??

WHAT PART of Edu-Forum "DEBATE" is it that Y'all don't understand ??!!

Chairs,

GPH

________________________

[Tim Carroll]

I was hoping to get to Dallas for the weekend, but my work schedule got too intense. I have a slim hope of trying to make it, but it's not looking good at the moment. I REALLY wanted to see Joan, and a host of others. I also really wanted to meet John!! So am still trying to find a way to fit it in. (Tho I have to be in court on the 18th and a lot of other stuff doing on....)

There are lots of afternoon flights available from Austin to Dallas on the 18th, which would get one there in time for opening sessions. But which one to attend, Lancer or COPA? It's hard to understand why Lancer is held way up the freeway at the Crown Plaza. The Hotel Lawrence still has rooms available at the internet rate of about $70. If you request a NW corner room on an upper floor, the view will be as shown in this photo taken from my room last year:

Tim Carroll

[Larry Hancock]

Dawn, I'm certainly expecting Barr on Saturday afternoon for the authors table

session from around 3pm to 6pm. I talked with him myself about three weeks or so

ago and he committed to being there. I hope he hasn't changed his mind, if so I have

not heard anything about it.

On Saturday we will be downtown in the Plaza for about 3 hours around noon,

doing guided walking tours and holding a memorial ceremony.

In regard to Ultimate Sacrifice, it should go on sale in bookstores on the 18th and

Andy W. hopes to have copies available for sale at the conferences. Lamar will

be speaking at Lancer on Friday afternoon at 5pm and then will be part of the

Sunday evening Authors round table and break out sessions....that would be

the best time for those interested to really talk with him about his new book.

For reference the full title of the book is:

Ultimate Sacrifice: John and Robert Kennedy, the Plan for a Coup in Cuba, and the Murder of JFK

-- Larry

Well I had thought about trying to talk Barr and Billy Sol into an arm wrestling match at the authors tables but perhaps this is all getting too confrontational.

Larry, I know this is just a bit of humor, but Barr is not going to be there is he? Last I heard ( a few weeks ago) he was not going to be at any of the conferences.

I was hoping to get to Dallas for the weekend, but my work schedule got too intense. I have a slim hope of trying to make it, but it's not looking good at the moment. I REALLY wanted to see Joan, and a host of others.

I also really wanted to meet John!! So am still trying to find a way to fit it in. (Tho I have to be in court on the 18th and a lot of other stuff doing on....)

Dawn

[Dawn Meredith]

Great pic Tim, thanx.

Dawn

By the way I too thought your questions to SOB Hemming were very civil and did not warrant such a harsh response. But we all know he's a crackpot. And a nasty one at that. Life must be hard when you're such a miserable person. Like our hero John Lennon once sang "One thig you can't hide is when you're crippled inside".

[Tim Gratz]

Tim Carroll wrote:

Arthur Schlesinger remembers the wording of the Miami speech differently:

"A search of the JFK Papers shows that Goodwin, Ralph Dungan, Bundy, Gordon Chase of Bundy's staff and I were involved in discussions about the speech. No evidence was uncovered of any contribution from FitzGerald and the CIA."

Tim, this is Schlesinger revisionist history at its most egregious. Moreover, it defies logic. I respect you as a logician. Do you suspect if the IAPA sppech contained a secret message to a Castro assassin-to-be records of that secret insert would be retained in the official White House records? Somewhat defeats the concept of plausible deniability, I should say.

Contemporaneously, the speech was seen as decidely anti-Castro. The speech described the Castro government as a "small band of conspirators" which formed a "barrier" which "once removed" would ensure United States support for progressive goals in Cuba.

The president, according to his aide McGeorge Bundy, sought to "encourage anti-Castro elements within Cuba to revolt". Bundy, "Meeting With the President," Dec. 19, 1963 (FRUS, #388, 908).

The Associated Press called the speech "an appeal to the Cuban people to overthrow the Castro regime." The Ithaca Journal ran the story under the front-page banner headline, "KENNEDY URGES OVERTHROW OF CASTRO."

And by the way the report that Kennedy used the IAPA speech to signal Cubela origniated not with Russo but with Seymour Hersh. A Church Committee lawyer, James Johnston, told Hersh that Seymour Bolton, who served as a CIA liaison to the Church Committee, “`went into orbit over the implication that the CIA was a rogue elephant.’ Bolton told Johnston that in 1963 Bolton had `carried a paragraph…to be inserted into Kennedy’s November 18 speech”…

Edited November 13, 2005 by Tim Gratz

[John Simkin]

I have a bit of a problem with those people who think the Kennedys were planning another invasion: At the same time I have no doubt they were hoping to provoke an uprising that would create the conditions for an invasion under Mongoose, or the subsequent covert program - and particularly the Artime autonomous group which operating from Costa Rica and Nicaragua. [Despite what some accounts say was code-named Second Naval Guerrilla, both Rafael Quintero, Artime's deputy, and Sam Halpern, executive assistant to Desmond Fitzgerald, the head of the Cuba task force at the time, both told me they never heard of.]

As I recall, Gus Russo's book, Live by The Sword, also claims - as I recall without going back to look for it - that Kennedy was planning another invasion, coming to that conclusion by selectively citing from a declassified document by Robert McNamara.

Don, we're of like minds on this issue. In Shackley's memoirs, he backs this up, claiming that they were trying to use Artime to foster an uprising in Cuba, and not pull a second invasion. I can see no upside for the Kennedys, politically speaking, to plan a second invasion for late 63, when they had the Russians signing nuclear test bans, and secret negotiations planned for Castro. It would have made no sense.

I fully agree Pat but we are wasting our time with Tim on this one. Tim will believe Russo’s theory whatever anyone says. There is no doubt JFK let it be known to the anti-Castro Cubans in Florida that he was still interested in removing Castro by force. That is what politicians do? Bush is still doing it. What is absolutely clear is that JFK was also attempting to negotiate a deal with Castro at the time of his death. This is not speculation. This is a fact that was confirmed by the release of classified documents in 2003. As you say, it is also a fact that JFK was involved in negotiating a nuclear test ban with the Soviets. What had happened to make JFK so keen on negotiating an end to the Cold War? The Cuban Missile Crisis. It is necessary to understand JFK’s reaction to this event to understand what he was really up to in 1963? It is JFK’s reaction to this that explains whether he was trying to mislead Castro or the anti-Castro Cubans?

The answer can be found in the oral history program at the John F. Kennedy. You will not find Russo quoting from this source to support his theory. Robert Kennedy makes it clear what his brother thought of those people who were still interested in removing Castro from power (Robert Kennedy: In His Own Words, 1988). That included Lyndon Johnson, George W. Anderson, Curtis LeMay, Douglas Dillon and Dean Acheson. RFK points out how these men were marginalized after the Cuban Missile Crisis. The one person that JFK and RFK continued to respect was Bob McNamara. The idea that JFK would have been involved in plotting to overthrow Castro with consulting McNamara was ridiculous. Yet this is what we have to believe if we accept the theory put forward by Hartman and Waldron. In other words, they have decided to believe an unnamed Cuban diplomat over that of people like McNamara and Dick Goodwin.