Did Fidel Kill Kennedy?

[Greg Wagner]

In any event, the above is further support for my point that the primary beneficiary of the death of John F. Kennedy was indeed Fidel Castro.[/color]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Tim Gratz

_______________________

JFK's death:

Who benefited?

Now let's see, LBJ was about to be indicted, but became president. Just a coincidence, I guess.

After LBJ we might have had Bobby Kennedy, but I guess the Castro forces killed him too, so we ended up with criminal Nixon.

Then came Warren Commissioner Ford, then for a brief 4 years Cater, but Bush Sr. and his little "October surprise" ended that, giving us 16 years of Reagan and Bush.

Then came Bill, and Monica gate...

Then two terms of Bush Jr.

Now how does Castro "benefit" from any of this????

To say that Castro was the principal befeficiary of JFk's death is hogwash, pure and simple.

There is no credible evidence that LBJ really BELIEVED that JFK was killed by a "foreign conspiracy".

I cannot believe this thread is even still going on.

Dawn

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Dawn-

Didn't LBJ, after he was out of office, state (privately, though I cannot remember who he allegedly said this to) that he thought the CIA was involved? I could be mistaken, but I thought I read that somewhere.

Edited February 19, 2005 by Greg Wagner

[Stan Wilbourne]

gone

Edited March 6, 2010 by Stan Wilbourne

[Greg Wagner]

For what it's worth, here's an interesting except from a 9/2004 Salon.com article:

Thanks to tapes of White House conversations that have been released to the public in recent years, we now know that the man who appointed the Warren Commission -- President Lyndon Johnson -- did not believe its conclusions. On Sept. 18, 1964, the last day the panel met, commission member Sen. Richard Russell phoned Johnson, his old political protégé, to tell him he did not believe the single-bullet theory, the key to the commission's finding that Oswald acted alone. "I don't either," Johnson told him.

Johnson's theories about what really happened in Dallas shifted over the years. Soon after the assassination, Johnson was led to believe by the CIA that Kennedy might have been the victim of a Soviet conspiracy. Later his suspicions focused on Castro; during his long-running feud with Robert Kennedy, LBJ leaked a story to Washington columnist Drew Pearson suggesting the Kennedy brothers themselves were responsible for JFK's death by triggering a violent reaction from the Cuban leader with their "goddamned Murder Inc." plots to kill him.

In 1967, according to a report in the Washington Post, Johnson's suspicious gaze came to rest on the CIA. The newspaper quoted White House aide Marvin Watson as saying that Johnson was "now convinced" Kennedy was the victim of a plot and "that the CIA had something to do with this plot." Max Holland, who has just published a study of LBJ's views on Dallas, "The Kennedy Assassination Tapes," intriguingly concludes that Johnson remained haunted by the murder throughout his tenure in the White House. "It is virtually an article of faith among historians that the war in Vietnam was the overwhelming reason the president left office in 1969, a worn, bitter, and disillusioned man," writes Holland. "Yet the assassination-related tapes paint a more nuanced portrait, one in which Johnson's view of the assassination weighed as heavily on him as did the war."

Edited February 20, 2005 by Greg Wagner

[Greg Wagner]

Greg,

If my memory serves me (and I've had guests and an admitted few glasses of wine), LBJ stated to Walter Cronkite in the late sixties that he thought Cuba was responsible for Kennedy's murder.

What a bunch of xxxx.

Anyone who has investigated this crime, that still comes away with the notion that "Castro did it" has a few screws loose.

There.  I said it.  I feel better.

I drive through town with a bumper sticker on the back of my car.  It reads:

DON'T WASTE MY BANDWIDTH

John???

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Stan-

Nothing like a touch of the grape to help cut to the chase! Speaking of which, it's Saturday night and I have yet to achieve an altered state of consciousness. I believe that's my cue. "Check please!"

[Tim Gratz]

Stan wrote:

If my memory serves me (and I've had guests and an admitted few glasses of wine), LBJ stated to Walter Cronkite in the late sixties that he thought Cuba was responsible for Kennedy's murder.

What a bunch of xxxx.

Anyone who has investigated this crime, that still comes away with the notion that "Castro did it" has a few screws loose.

There. I said it. I feel better.

Don't feel quite so good, Stanley. It says something about your intellect that you would have to resort to vulgarisms to have to make your point.

And that you would charge that Attorney Joseph Califano, Dean Michael Kurtz, General Alexander Haig and Joseph Trento have "a few screws loose" because they believe Castro did it just adds to my point.

The knowledge of either one of these gentlemen, sir, I am certain, exceeds yours by 100 per cent.

Since you have questioned the SANITY of people who disagree with you, perhaps you would be kind enough to post the highest level of your educational attainment.

[Tim Gratz]

I want to add here that I respect the arguments and sarcsasms of Robert Charles-Dunne. I appreciate a vigorous intellectual debate; I believe it sharpens the knowledge of both sides. Mr. Charles-Dunne's arguments are articulate (but wrong). He has never stooped to vulgarity nor questioned the sanity of those with whom he disagrees (I wonder about his recent remark about the Key West air, however). When I get a round TUIT I will respond to his most recent post. HIS posts require analysis and consideration and indeed I look forward to them.

[Shanet Clark]

....I heard it was colonel mustard in the library with a candlestick ...

[Tim Gratz]

Dawn wrote:

In any event, the above is further support for my point that the primary beneficiary of the death of John F. Kennedy was indeed Fidel Castro.

Tim Gratz

_______________________

JFK's death:

Who benefited?

Now let's see, LBJ was about to be indicted, but became president. Just a coincidence, I guess. [/color]

I guess my point was who benefited the MOST, and who had the STRONGEST motive.

Castro's motive: save his life.

LBJ's motive: stay out of jail.

The strongest motive, of course, is self preservation.

I also find it rather amusing that my Democrat friends were probably (or would have been) the strongest supporters of LBJ in 1964 when most of us Goldwater supporters knew he was a crook. We all had copies of "A Texan Looks at Lyndon." Now some of you will concede LBJ was a crook and contend he was probably a murderer as well. So . . .do you admit that Goldwater supporters were correct to reject the presidential candidacy of a crook?

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

Stan wrote:

If my memory serves me (and I've had guests and an admitted few glasses of wine), LBJ stated to Walter Cronkite in the late sixties that he thought Cuba was responsible for Kennedy's murder.

What a bunch of xxxx.

Anyone who has investigated this crime, that still comes away with the notion that "Castro did it" has a few screws loose.

There.  I said it.  I feel better.

Don't feel quite so good, Stanley.  It says something about your intellect that you would have to resort to vulgarisms to have to make your point.

Tim, you know you're peddling a very hard sell, indeed.  Hence, you can hardly be surprised to encounter vehement opposition to your hypothesis; it depends exclusively on extrapolating far too many conclusions from far too few spurious details, all of which originated with Langley, and those who regurgitate it poorly for mass consumption. 

As for your objection to "vulgarisms," this seems as prudishly precious as it does specious.  Some of us think it highly vulgar that anyone would deliberately misdirect the public's attention in a case of such paramount importance.  As Stan, himself, pointed out: this case is "not a parlor game to pass time." 

And that you would charge that Attorney Joseph Califano, Dean Michael Kurtz, General Alexander Haig and Joseph Trento have "a few screws loose" because they believe Castro did it just adds to my point.

Tim, Stan didn't mention any of those people, though you feel the need to whenever cornered.  There's only strength in numbers when the argument they make is compelling.  Otherwise, it's merely: "Great minds think alike and fools seldom differ." 

You're also far too literate not to have noticed Stan's qualifier "Anyone who has investigated this crime, that still comes away with the notion that "Castro did it" has a few screws loose."  At least two of the four names you mentioned make no claim to have "investigated this crime," and at least one of the remaining names hasn't so much investigated the case as paraphrased a faulty hypothesis without improving it.  Your invocation of their names doesn't bolster your case at all; it only disparages them by your inclusion of them as your fellow travelers.

The knowledge of either one of these gentlemen, sir, I am certain, exceeds yours by 100 per cent.

And because these four gentlemen are your fellow travelers, ipso facto, your knowledge must, likewise, exceed Stan's by 100 per cent?

I wouldn't be so certain about that, were I in your shoes, Tim.  After all, the learned men you cite have reached an unconvincing conclusion, as you might have detected from the complete and utter lack of support for it displayed among posters here.  Surely it hasn't escaped your notice that you have still yet to achieve a single convert to your hypothesis.

Nor do you add gravitas to your argument by being so flippantly dismissive of those whose understanding of the case you don't even know.  If you're actually trying to win converts to your cause, this is not the best way to achieve it. 

Since you have questioned the SANITY of people who disagree with you, perhaps you would be kind enough to post the highest level of your educational attainment.

Um, Tim.... If and when Stan cites his MA and Phd., will this mean that you, and the men you cite, are insane?  Clearly not.  So why even raise such irrelevant points?  Were this merely a matter of academic qualifications, the case would have been solved yonks ago. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Shanet Clark]

Right on Robert Charles Dunne well put.

Stan was just stating plainly what we all think of this herring...

TIM GRATZ has sources he is defending as firm, sacrosanct, infallible.

What sources are these, that are unimpeachable and central to his theory?

"Attorney Joseph Califano, Dean Michael Kurtz, General Alexander Haig and Joseph Trento " Unquote.

Trento based his narrative on CIA sources including DESMOND FITZGERALD and JAMES JESUS ANGLETON.

This obviously is ca-ca, or scheidt, or foul offal, or septic human sewage, barnyard droppings, scat, nitrate soil, night soil, manure, waste,

Stan knows it, Greg knows it and everybody else knows it,

( I guess Tim doesn't know it yet )......

Edited February 21, 2005 by Shanet Clark

[Greg Wagner]

Greg,

If my memory serves me (and I've had guests and an admitted few glasses of wine), LBJ stated to Walter Cronkite in the late sixties that he thought Cuba was responsible for Kennedy's murder.

What a bunch of xxxx.

Anyone who has investigated this crime, that still comes away with the notion that "Castro did it" has a few screws loose.

There.  I said it.  I feel better.

I drive through town with a bumper sticker on the back of my car.  It reads:

DON'T WASTE MY BANDWIDTH

John???

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Stan-

I think this memorable statement calls for a special designation. I dub you, WABOS. You sure cut to the chase!

Edited February 21, 2005 by Greg Wagner

[Ron Ecker]

And that you would charge that Attorney Joseph Califano, Dean Michael Kurtz, General Alexander Haig and Joseph Trento have "a few screws loose" because they believe Castro did it just adds to my point.

I'm not sure that quoting these guys is much of an argument. I remember Califano. He struck me as just another slick insider politician. I wouldn't trust him for the time of day. I've never heard of Kurtz and I haven't read Trento, but Alexander Haig seems to have been right in the middle of the anti-Castro operations, signing off on raids into Cuba, so he claims. I'm sure that Haig would have loved to see Castro blamed for the assassination and Cuba invaded. If you could have asked Haig if Castro did it, I can just hear Haig saying in his inimitable manner, "Why of course he did! If you don't believe me, go ask Joe Califano!"

Ron

[Dawn Meredith]

Greg,

If my memory serves me (and I've had guests and an admitted few glasses of wine), LBJ stated to Walter Cronkite in the late sixties that he thought Cuba was responsible for Kennedy's murder.

What a bunch of xxxx.

Anyone who has investigated this crime, that still comes away with the notion that "Castro did it" has a few screws loose.

There.  I said it.  I feel better.

I drive through town with a bumper sticker on the back of my car.  It reads:

DON'T WASTE MY BANDWIDTH

John???

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Stan-

I think this memorable statement calls for a special designation. I dub you, WABOS.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

_____________________________

Yea Robert Charles, Shanet and Stan.

Tim: Yes Castro did not die, but it was not JFK who was trying to kill him. But I suppose you will continue to " read" this into whatever author you read, and post such. Regardless to the massive evidence to the contrary.

Yes even tho I am a Democrat, I have known Lyndon was a crook as long as I can remember. And if one believes all that has been written about his relationship with one Malcolm Wallace, also a murderer.

I did not like either candidate in 1964. Just because one realized Lyndon was a bad guy does not a Republican make.

Dawn

[Tim Gratz]

Dawn wrote:

Tim: Yes Castro did not die, but it was not JFK who was trying to kill him. But I suppose you will continue to " read" this into whatever author you read, and post such. Regardless to the massive evidence to the contrary.

Dawn, no you are right. It was not JFK who was personally going to shoot Castro (which must be what you meant).

It was JFK's agents, acting upon his authority and direction, and particularly through his brother.

Please cite some of your "massive evidence to the contrary".

I keep asking the people who disagree with the "Castro did it" scenario for actual evidence. So far, NONE has been forthcoming.

I asked Robert Charles-Dunne certain questions re Gary Underhill, after I read more information about him. Were any of those questions answered? Nada. (Nor has anyone else answered those questions, for that matter.

As I said before, there comes a time to "put up or shot up".

I have posted information that is strongly suggestion of Cuban involvement in the assassination. Robert Charles-Dunne SPECULATES that the infoprmation MAY be false because it came from the CIA. He has offered no evidence that the information was false.

You are an attorney. Why don't you try to posit five pieces of evidence that would be admissible in court to demonstrate that someone other than Castro did it?

Edited February 22, 2005 by Tim Gratz

[David G. Healy]

Tim G posted:

[...]

I have posted information that is strongly suggestion of Cuban involvement in the assassination.

[...]

Having followed this thread from the inception, gotta tell ya, sounds like pure speculation! Far cry from "proof"...

David Healy