Cliff Varnell

CLIFF VARNELL: The primary goal of the JFK assassination was to establish a pre-text for a military invasion of Cuba ASHTON: ...you still haven't answered the question: For whom? CLIFF VARNELL: Those with a vested interest in a US military take-over of Cuba. Mostly Cowboys, if I may use Carl Oglesby's Yankee/Cowboy dichotomy.. Yes you have. For some reason you don't want to acknowledge it as such. I cited Johnson's blessing of Lansdale's kill-JFK plotting. You know, Vice-President Johnson. I didn't realize you wanted to present me a grade school civics quiz. Ashton, you're asking me who has authority over the military? And my answer is the President. And you're asking me who are the top people in the military? And my answer is the Joint Chiefs of Staff. How'd I do? Do I get an "A"? May we resume the discussion of the case? Or...Did you think I was refering to another Johnson when I cited the blessings of "LeMay, Hoover, Helms, Angleton, Johnson"?? And, of course, I cited THIS in my original response, lo so many days ago, but I apologize for not under-lining the key points. I'll put the important stuff in caps nice and bold: From James Bamford's BODY OF SECRETS, pg 87, 4/10/62 CJCS Lemnitzer memo to Sec Def McNamara, emphasis added: (quote on) THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF believe that the Cuban problem must be solved in the near future...Further, they see no prospect of early success in overthrowing the present communist regime either as a result of internal uprising or external political, economic or psychological pressures. Accordingly they believe that MILITARY INTERVENTION by the United States will be required to overthrow the present communist regime...THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF believe that the United States can undertake MILITARY INTERVENTION in Cuba WITHOUT RISK OF GENERAL WAR. They also believe that the intervention can be accomplished rapidly enough to MINIMIZE communist opportunities for solicitation of U.N. action. (quote off) Although Kennedy sacked Lemnitzer as CJCS and replaced him with Gen. Maxwell Taylor, General Curtis LeMay stayed on as Air Force Chief. That's the main name in the military on Eleven Twenty Two -- LeMay. According to Paul O'Connor LeMay attended the autopsy, smoking his big cigar... One more time. With feeling.(quote on) THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF believe that the United States can undertake MILITARY INTERVENTION in Cuba WITHOUT RISK OF GENERAL WAR. They also believe that the intervention can be accomplished rapidly enough to MINIMIZE communist opportunities for solicitation of U.N. action. (quote off) I haven't been naming names? Top military super-hawks -- Lansdale, LeMay, Lemnitzer. Top CIA involvement -- Helms and Angleton. Top Evil Rich Perp -- H.L. Hunt The Unholy Trio who put the plot together -- Lansdale, Phillips, Morales. Players primed to play ball: Hoover, Johnson, Dulles, Bush, Giancana. What did all these ball players have in common? They wanted to play ball again in Cuba -- each with their own agenda. Why didn't that happen? The patsy wasn't rubbed out on Eleven Twenty Two as planned. This is the conclusion I've drawn, and I cite the following works: Gaeton Fonzi's THE LAST INVESTIGATION James Bamford's BODY OF SECRETS (chapter on Operation Northwoods) Larry Hancock's SOMEONE WOULD HAVE TALKED Anything by Rex Bradford esp. his work on Hoover's Oswald-the-Fidelista file. I'll also argue that the nature of the throat wound and Kennedy's response to it suggests that the weapon that fired the round was most likely created by Mitchell WerBell III. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKwerbell.htm I'll argue that WerBell adapted the blood-soluble paralytic originally developed for the CIA and military by Charles Senseney. http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/r..._6_Senseney.pdf I'll argue that this scenario matches the credible witness statements (in Dealey Plaza, at Parkland, at Bethesda), the Dealey Plaza photo evidence, and the historical record. ASHTON: For whose benefit? CLIFF VARNELL: Depends on their proximity to pre-Castro business interests. Contentless dismissal is not argument, much less a rebuttal. That's it! You're Speering me and I don 't dig it. I truly enjoy discussing this case with you, Aston, but when you put quotation marks around sentences YOU wrote and attribute the statement to me -- it pisses me off. The last time you did it, I let it slide. No more, please. I'd like to keep this collegial. PLEASE quote me directly and accurately when characterizing my position, and I will show you the same respect. Okay? Now, I never said the case was "totally solved." I never used those words. I feel the case is solved to 95%. In fact, I like to invoke what I call... The Cliff Varnell 95% -- JFK Assassination Rules of Thumb: Rule #1: 95% of the first day witness statements are credible. Rule #2: 95% of the photographic evidence is genuine. (There are cases where the witness statements and the photo evidence are at odds). Rule #3: There's a 95% chance that elements within the American National Security state -- Pentagon/CIA operatives -- killed Kennedy with the intent to establish a pre-text for the invasion of Cuba. Rule #4: 95% of what is said and written about this case is bullxxxx, including the 2 million plus words from the usenet postings of one nksy@sfo.com (me). No, Ashton, we just finished the top of the ninth and according to the rules of baseballI don't have to take my last at bats so I'm kicking it in the locker room knocking down a couple of my favorite intoxicants... Please re-read my statement. I'll re-state it with a key word in bold... I think Lansdale put it together INITIALLY on a "rogue" basis IOW, Lansdale was putting it together while still talking to the generals about taking advantage of a possible explosion of the John Glenn launch, winter '62. I'll cite the relevant passage again: James Bamford's BODY OF SECRETS (pg 84): (quote on) On February 20, 1962, [John]Glenn was to lift off from Cape Canaveral, Florida, on his historic journey. The flight was to carry the banner of America's virtues of truth, freedom, and democracy into orbit high over the planet. But [Chairman of the JCS] Lemnitzer and his Chiefs had a different idea. They proposed to [Operation Mongoose chief] Lansdale that, should the rocket explode and kill Glenn, "the objective is to provide irrevocable proof that...the fault lies with the Communists et al Cuba [sic]." This would be accomplished, Lemnitzer continued, "by manufacturing various pieces of evidence which would prove electronic interference on the part of the Cubans." Thus, as NASA prepared to send the first American into space, the Joint Chiefs of Staff were preparing to use John Glenn's possible death as a pre-text to launch a war. (quote off) I think that Lansdale had other ideas, something a bit more pro-active than waiting around for a rocket to explode. In this sense Lansdale (plotting with Phillips and Morales) were acting on their own, INITIALLY. Before long they received the material support of H.L. Hunt and Sam Giancana, and the blessings of Dickie Helms, Jay Jay Angleton, Miss Hoover, Poppy Bush, Allen "the Man" Dulles, and the Vice President of the United State Lyndon Baines Johnson. What you could do is address the points I make and not the ones I don't make. I have never argued that Lansdale could order the military invasion of Cuba. Where do you come up with stuff, Ashton? You habitually remove most of what I write and replace it with straw. What Lansdale did, with the help of Phillips and Morales, was arrange for the President of the United States to be assassinated and his death blamed on Fidel-lover L.H. Oswald. The plan -- which was vetted with the sitting Vice President -- was to produce "irrevocable proof" that Oswald was an agent of Fidel. The plotters didn't particularly care if the conspiratorial nature of the crime was revealed as long as the patsy was gunned down soon after the deed. This did not happen, of course, which is why Mickey and Minnie ain't knocking back virgin Cuba Libres at the Havana Disneyland, not yet anyway. (And, yes, I know that you answered a different question than the one I asked, but then, that's just another form of no-answer to what I did ask, so we're at strike three.) I've answered your questions. As you noted, this is not an original position I'm laying out here. I'm summing up what many regard as the bulk of the evidence. It's disappointing to Parlor Gamers to hear that the game has been over for years. ASHTON: Run by whom? CLIFF VARNELL: Ed Lansdale, David Phillips, David Morales. <Sigh> Cliff, you've gone over a cliff. Every one of my questions with "whom" in it was precisely and exclusively and only pursuant to, and relevant to, and directed to your assertion of motive for the assassination, that being, according to you, "to establish a pre-text for a military invasion of Cuba." I didn't ask you who you think the assassination was "run by." I asked you who would run a military invasion of Cuba. And what part of the phrase "PENTAGON documents" don't you understand? What part of Operation Northwoods don't you get? What part of the phrase "THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF" confuses you? Or the phrase "MILITARY INTERVENTION"? "WITHOUT RISK OF GENERAL WAR"? To whom do you think I was refering when I cited the "blessings" of this Operation Northwoods-type JFK assassination plot coming from "LeMay, Hoover, Helms, Angleton, Johnson"...??? Tell it to the Marines, pal. Ashton Tell it to tourists, Ashton. Your little first grade civics quiz is silly.

For whom "to invade Cuba?" I should have phrased that with more precision: The primary goal of the JFK assassination was to establish a pre-text for a military invasion of Cuba. You accomplished more precision; you still haven't answered the question: All my posts on this thread count for nothing? Those with a vested interest in a US military take-over of Cuba. Mostly Cowboys, if I may use Carl Oglesby's Yankee/Cowboy dichotomy, which, as I have noted elsewhere, didn't apply to guys like Allen Dulles and Mr. George Bush of the CIA who straddled both camps. Depends on their proximity to pre-Castro business interests. I think J Edgar Hoover's or Gen. LeMay's interests in a Cuban takeover were more ideological, whereas Bush and Giancana may have found the ideological component incidental. I think Lansdale put it together initially on a "rogue" basis -- first stop, Mr. HL Hunt -- but by game-time he had the blessing of LeMay, Hoover, Helms, Angleton, Johnson. Ed Lansdale, David Phillips, David Morales. [cue Treasure of the Sierra Madre] "Badges? We don' need no steenkeen badges!!"

Oswald was sheep-dipped two ways to Sunday as an agent of Fidel -- which indicates to me a very narrow purpose. We'll never know the elaborate file on Oswald that David Phillips possessed in Mexico City, but Hoover's Oswald-the-Fidelista file sure was impressive. I just can't buy the idea that JFK's death was arranged in that manner if the sole idea was to kill him. Can you imagine how pissed off Aristotle Onassis was when he found out that THEY blew JFK's brains out right in the face of HIS, Ari O's, GIRLFRIEND?? Ari let it slide because [cue Al Pacino] it was business, Sonny.

Cliff, Do you know which building HL Hunt owned in Dealey Plaza? Do the Hunts still own it? Thanks. My understanding is that Hunt co-owned the Dal-Tex Building with Clint Murchison. Should Jack White weigh in on this, that's the answer.

I salute Gaeton Fonzi, Vincent Salandria, Jim Marrs, James Bamford, Larry Hancock and Rex Bradford. Many others are more than worthy, but these guys cracked the case, imo.

Bingo! And let's not forget another little name that fits in there -- Joe Kennedy.Joe Kennedy and W. Averell Harriman were pillars of the Eastern Establishment. This is where the Carl Oglesby Yankee-Cowboy dichotomy applies, imo. John Kennedy was a product of the Eastern Establishment. W. Averell Harriman was the architect of State Dept policy in Southeast Asia -- got his way in Laos, and he got his way in the overthrow of Diem in Vietnam. W. Averell Harriman was a man used to getting his way. As long as he continued to get his way I doubt that he'd want JFK murdered. But, Terry, I'm open minded. If you can make a case for John Kennedy getting into hot water with Harriman in 1963, I'd like to see it. Steel. I don't buy it. After his dust up with the steel companies JFK worked very hard to curry favor with the business community. http://www.whitehousetapes.org/news/shreve_taxcut_2001.pdf Note the names of the "prominent businessmen" who supported JFK's 1962 tax cut policy: Tom Watson of IBM, Frederick Kappel of AT&T, and Henry Ford II of Ford Motor Co. If those guys were on board with JFK economic policy, then JFK didn't get whacked by a consortium of mainstream US businessmen, imo. Whenever there is a moderate-liberal President and a Democratic Congress the business community publicly frets over policy. It's SOP. PR. Part of the job. JFK advocted a tax cut for business at the risk of budget deficits, for cry'n out loud... I think you can argue that Robert Blough, Chairman of US Steel, had a motive to murder JFK because of the humiliating way he made Blough back-down on steel prices in spring 1962. Can you argue that Robert Blough had the means and opportunity to murder JFK? I'd argue HL Hunt as the top Evil-Rich-Perp, since he owned a building in Dealey Plaza, and could wield influence with Dallas law enforcement. But if you can tie Robert Blough to the events of Eleven Twenty Two -- I'm all ears. &btw, David L. Lawrence was a Democrat.

...I love it when people pooh-pooh my argument without ever addressing a single point I raise. Cliff, easy there, son. If I'd a'thunk at all that the "LLL Generals and Cuban Kennedy Killers Killed Kennedy for to Get Cuba Invaded" model was your own private personal thing, I would have swept me hat off and bowed low before issuing a single pooh-pooh. I did not think that; I was of the opinion that the notion is as popular as Cracker Jacks, and you were merely sharing a handful with your friends. Ashton, I cannot tell you how happy I am with this appraisal. You are exactly correct. I certainly hope this notion is that popular. I arrived at it a bit differently: I came to it through the throat wound. The throat wound made the case so that I could join those who came before me, upon whose shoulders I stand. I really am not one to *share* my Cracker Jacks, however. I'm more like the kid who shows you that he has Cracker Jacks and he's going to eat them by himself.

Cliff, I addressed your claim about Vietnam being incidental and you didn't even mention it. I only had so much time this morning, Michael. Thank you for your response, as always. I went to see my Oakland Raiders play the St. Louis Rams...painful beyond belief...anyway, I've been responding to posts every since I got back. And yet they were plenty concerned with Castro, no? The Northwoods documents indicatesa high level of interest in establishing a pretext to invade Cuba and lo and behold up pops Lee Oswald recently from Mexico City and his dance with the Commies... I'm not a Co-Incidentalist. The "nuke China" agenda wasn't necessarily shared with the rest of the perps. Each had their own agenda -- with the super hawks they wanted a freer hand under LBJ -- but the one goal all shared was the immediate POLICY toward Cuba. I value your input, and I'll try harder, Michael.

You bet. And what about Mr. George Bush of the CIA? Lots of people. Not just Eastern Establishment types. Dulles and the Bushestranscend the Yankee/Cowboy dichotomy, straddling both camps. Better believe it. And the name of that man...H. L. Hunt. Of course. What, the only rich evil scumbags in the world come out of the "Eastern Establishment"? Gimme a break. It's like blaming the all evils of the world on Bill and Hillary Clinton. Same folks as Mr. George Bush of the CIA. Pretty much. Lots of fingers in lots of pies. And what was John Kennedy taking away from the ruling eastern establishment?Certainly not anything to do with Southeast Asian policy -- Harriman called the shots on the Diem overthrow, with Lodge his man in Saigon 11/63. The "Eastern Establishment" just scored a foreign policy victory -- the overthrow of the Diem regime in 'Nam -- and then they turned right around and killed their own "Yankee" commander-in-chief? Whom among the Eastern Establishment did JFK get into dutch? Over what? They blew his brains out right in his wife's face. That is hate, baby. Hate for Jackie. I mean, just think about it. You have a hundred ways to kill the guy -- if that is the sole motivation, to simply end JFK's life -- and the way you pick to do it involves blowing his brains out with blood all over her pretty pink dress? What does a corpse care if it was slaughtered in public or put to death in its sleep? It had to be Jackie. They must have really hated her, these "Eastern Establishment" perps. Gee, except that the Bouvier's were Eastern Establishment, as well, weren't they? Mean to each other, these "liberal Eastern Establishment" types... You left out: W. Averell Harriman, Prescott Bush and his son George, and a guy named Joe Kennedy. I'd like to hear your argument that JFK had crossed any of the above in some manner so grave that they'd facilitate his murder. The only name above I see interested in Kennedy's death is Mr. George Bush of the CIA. And that's because of CUBA.

And when you're done thinking real hard about all that please note that I based my case on PENTAGON documents. I hope no one here is denying the super aggressive posture toward Cuba betrayed by Generals Lansdale, Lemnitzer, and LeMay. I love it when people pooh-pooh my argument without ever addressing a single point I raise. Operation Northwoods connected to the CIA through Lansdale. I'm looking forward to hearing an actual argument -- as opposed to righteously repeated conclusions -- as to why the Eastern Establishment wanted to kill one of their own.

************************************************ The CIA is the armed forces, police officers, goon-squad, and/or private security services of the Old Guard, the Eastern Establishment, the Aristocratic Blue-Bloods, the financial houses and/or holding companies, aka banks, of the Anglo-American power bases located on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean and which comprise those districts subject to the prevailing markets of New York City and London, and dictate who's to win and who's to lose, who's to live and who's to die. It's been carved in stone that way since the first money-lenders hit these shores in the 1500's, and started buying up the place with beads. What about the oil industry? What about the illicit drug trade? The CIA has never operated in those people's interests? The great thing about Oglesby's Yankee/Cowboy model is that one realizes that "the CIA" was not a monolithic entity, but was indeed riven with factions, some of which were aligned with the Eastern Establishment Yankees, and some aligned with the oil industry/aeronautic operators like Hunt or Hughes -- the Cowboys. I'll argue the "conservative" Cowboys killed Kennedy.

Bingo! And let's not forget another little name that fits in there -- Joe Kennedy.Joe Kennedy and W. Averell Harriman were pillars of the Eastern Establishment. This is where the Carl Oglesby Yankee-Cowboy dichotomy applies, imo. John Kennedy was a product of the Eastern Establishment. W. Averell Harriman was the architect of State Dept policy in Southeast Asia -- got his way in Laos, and he got his way in the overthrow of Diem in Vietnam. W. Averell Harriman was a man used to getting his way. As long as he continued to get his way I doubt that he'd want JFK murdered. But, Terry, I'm open minded. If you can make a case for John Kennedy getting into hot water with Harriman in 1963, I'd like to see it.

Isn't it obvious after reading SOMEONE WOULD HAVE TALKED? It's really quite simple -- kill Kennedy, blame Castro, invade Cuba. The collateral damage of good research (as well as direct dis/mis-info) is to make the case appear far more complex than the evidence indicates.

For whom "to invade Cuba?" I should have phrased that with more precision: The primary goal of the JFK assassination was to establish a pre-text for a military invasion of Cuba. Are you familiar with the Operation Northwoods documents, Ashton? http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/ James Bamford's BODY OF SECRETS (pg 84), emphasis added: Robert McNamara shot down Operation Northwoods in March of 1962, but the super-hawks were persistent. BODY OF SECRETS (pg 87), Lemnitzer wrote in a memorandum to McNamara, April 10, 1962, emphasis added: It was the thinking of the super-hawks -- LeMay, Lemnitzer, Lansdale -- that as long as they could produce "irrevocable proof" that Fidel was a very bad actor, an invasion of Cuba could commence "without risk of general war." No, someone "forgot" to ace the patsy right after the assassination. The plot ultimately failed in its primary objective because the oh-so-carefully sheep-dipped patsy survived to be captured alive, protesting his innocence. The captured patsy demolished the "irrevocable proof" standard required for hostile action by the US military. Besides, it isn't a mystery who "they" were, is it? Start with the Generals "L" -- LeMay, Lemnitzer, and Lansdale. We have our high CIA perps -- Helms and Angleton. We have the CIA coup-masters who worked alongside Lansdale in the nuts-'n-bolts orchestration of the assassination -- David Phillips (in charge of sheep-dipping the patsies -- plural) and David Morales (probably handled the shooters and designed the ambush). Hoover had all kinds of ginned up intel purporting Oswald trips to Cuba. Texas oilmen Hunt and Murchison owned the Dal-Tex Building, which was never searched. Ruby's connections lead back to the Chicago Outfit and Sam Giancana. The assassination was organized around a drastic change in US policy toward Cuba -- not around the individual agendas of the various players. That's imho, a course.

If you define "the CIA" as Richard Helms and James J. Angleton, which is as high as it went, imo. The guys with the most experience at over-throwing heads of state would obviously be CIA -- indeed, Edward Lansdale, David Phillips, and David Morales. But I don't buy the idea that any particular institution or standing entity "did-it." The primary goal of the JFK assassination was to establish a pre-text to invade Cuba. All other agendas were incidental, imo. That Johnson wanted to avoid being dumped from the ticket and face investigation in the Bobby Baker scandal was incidental to the murder of JFK. That Sam Giancana wanted to get Bobby Kennedy off his back -- incidental. That the Texas oilmen wanted to protect the oil depletion allowance -- incidental. That Hoover personally detested JFK and feared being fired in the 2nd JFK Adm. -- incidental. That the military hawks wanted a more aggressive policy in Vietnam -- incidental. What all the perps and associates had in common was a desire to invade Cuba. That might not have been the primary motive of those who faced legal problems in a a 2nd JFK Adm., like Giancana or Johnson, but it was the motive that all shared.

No, but that does not mean that the information in the book is incorrect. In fact, details of a letter that was sent to Lee Harvey Oswald from Cuba was originally suppressed by G2 because it seemed that the plot against JFK had started in Cuba. However, this letter was eventually proved to be part of the conspiracy to implicate Oswald. This letter was given to the House Select Committee on Assassinations and then they suppressed it because it implicated the CIA in the conspiracy. Escalante worked with Claudia Furiati on her 1994 book ZR/RIFLE The Plot to Kill Kennedy and Castro. http://www.namebase.org/sources/dC.html I'm looking forward to hearing anything new. The names of the shooters are irrelevant. For those Parlor Gamers out there contemplating all the "false mystery" of the JFK case -- stick a fork in it. This case is cracked.

I like your approach to the case, Carl. There is an even simpler albeit similar explanation: a powerful faction within the American ruling elite killed Kennedy in order to facilitate an invasion of Cuba. I think a lot of people came to that conclusion years ago, especially after the 2001 publication of James Bamford's BODY OF SECRETS and its revelations of Operation Northwoods. Reading Larry Hancock's awesome SOMEONE WOULD HAVE TALKED brings it all back home. Who were the pre-eminent American coup masters in 1963? Ed Lansdale, David Phillips and David Morales, all CIA or CIA connected. They weren't reacting to the Bay of Pigs so much as pro-actively pursuing the same goal. The assassination was organized around a POLICY that transcended institutional or group identifications. To throw around these group names "the CIA did it," "the Mob did it," "the FBI did it," "Texas oil men did it" is the old three-blind-men-and-elephant routine, imo. We'll never know the names of the shooters, but the names and motivations of those who pulled off JFK's public execution have, in all likelihood, been revealed.

I mis-identified the Hat Man "sweet spot" as the Badgeman position in earlier posts. Sloppy. I stand corrected.

Nice collection, JL! Let's start out with the photo on the upper left...That was J. Edgar Hoover giving that pushy little twerp Arlen Specter the Shaft Royale -- on the other side the back entrance wound was five inches below Specter's little pointer. The SBT is so absurd even Hoover couldn't buy it. I love the Dale Myers' animation. Guy won an Emmy for it. It shows what it would look like if three inches of JFK's jacket (and shirt) were bunched up entirely above the C7 "back-of-the-neck-wound". This is elementary school stuff, folks. Look at the Myers cartoon -- JFK's shirt collar is not visible. Look at Croft3 lower left corner -- JFK's shirt collar clearly visible. Ditto Willis4&5, Betzner3, and the Towner film. The Houston St. segment of the Nix film (as shown on Unsolved History) actually shows the jacket collar drop. Shirt collar not visible -- jacket up. Shirt collar visible -- jacket down. JFK on Elm St. -- jacket down. SBT dead. I'm thinking of doing a website called "See Jacket Drop -- how to explain the fact of JFK conspiracy to a 6 year old." But some how, such an exercise seems demeaning, some how, y'know?

Z161

You got the right ta ta but the wrong ho ho. Who were the cops scouring the back-fence area for evidence of shooters? Probably the shooters themselves. [cue Joe Pesci] Don't you GET IT??

You got the right ta ta but the wrong ho ho. Who were the cops scouring the back-fence area for evidence of shooters? Probably the shooters themselves.

The Bush family is going thru a bad case of the "blue what-ifs." What if Jeb had won in Florida in '94? He would have run for President in 2000, not Geo. With Jeb you have an effective fascist, not this nincompoop running around turning everything he touches into xxxx. Instead of Michael, we got Fredo. The Godfather is crying over the ruination of the family political brand.

Same old non sequitar... The Single Bullet Theory requires JFK's clothing to have hiked up 3 inches. The Croft photo shows folds in the jacket. Therefore, JFK's clothing hiked up 3 inches. Btw, the Towner film ends around Z140. That's a bit more than a second before Croft. Betzner #3 was taken after Croft and shows the visible shirt collar, whether Richard B. is capable of seeing it or not.

No one hit?