Michael Clark

22 hours ago, Eddy Bainbridge said:

...... The Northwoods document outlining the suggested Joint   Chiefs of Staff pretexts for war with Cuba is scary. I could not help imagining the obvious unlisted pretext that may have been implemented.

Eddy, I have the following quote posted in my Double-cross CT thread, here...

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/23710-did-a-far-rightindustrial-faction-double-cross-a-mobanti-castro-faction/

"Gil Jesus wrote

The subject of assassination as a tool of state (in regard to Cuba) was discussed by JFK and Smathers. Smathers could not remember whether he brought it up or JFK did, but Smathers suggested, according to Warren Hinkle and William Turner (Deadly Secrets-The CIA/Mafia War against Castro and the Assassination of JFK, pg. 73) , that any assassination attempt be coupled with a staged incident at the Guantanamo Naval Base that would provide a pretext for intervention by American Forces.

Smathers' suggestion about using Guantanamo as an excuse to invade Cuba was similar to the plan suggested by Richard Nixon in his post-invasion visit to the White House when he suggested finding "legal cover" such as "defending our base at Guantanamo" as an excuse for "going in ".

Shortly thereafter, Kennedy learned enough of Smathers' right-wing associations to make him wary."

39 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Mike:

Does the above statement mean I do not have a view at to who actually pulled off the hit?

I guess you have not read Destiny Betrayed, second edition, either. 

James, your a busy guy, you may not recall something I posted on the Chomsky thread, to which you replied. I stated that I would  bump this if I came across it again. I am just following through here.

Correct, I have not read your book yet.

343

342

341

340

339

On 1/11/2017 at 3:33 PM, James DiEugenio said:

I liked Jack personally.......

....................

Personally, I think we should stay away from trying to name the actual assassins, especially at this late date.

 

James, this is the post that I referred to recently, on another thread.

On 7/17/2017 at 5:18 PM, Eddy Bainbridge said:

I would like to know what views people have on this idea ( That the assassination was planned as a pretext for war) Specifically I want to know what stopped it working? 

Well Eddy, I believe you have heard this from me before on another thread, but I don't post it frequently because I don't want to sound like a broken record ( it's funny how out-of-date that idiom is), but here is my take on that.

My working theory is that the assassination was set-up to be a pre-text for a Cuban invasion, but that invasion plan was undermined by a far-right industrial faction.

It is often said that the invasion was aborted for fear of WW3; I am not buying that because that possibility would have been present prior to the planning of, and the act of assassination. So that problem didn't pop-up after the DP hit.

I am thinking that Texas industrialists and right-wingers double-crossed an Anti-Castro / Mafia element, (who actually did the shooting), by eliminating the evidence of conspiracy, and mixed that with a little bit of blackmail. They foiled the conspiracy angle. They did this, hypothetically, by making evidence disappear and making other evidence appear. I suspect a shooter or operative was killed in the Plaza, who was supposed to be ID'd as a Pro-Castro Cuban. They made this body, or person, and other evidence, disappear. 

They, The Texas industrial and right wing faction, were able to do this because their original responsibility was passive; they were supposed to do nothing, therefore there would be no evidence implicating them locally. Perhaps they were supposed to create a lot of noise, static and background noise so the hit would not come as much of a surprise as well as causing resources to be stretched thin, but that was it. There was noise and static about a hit all over the country.

The reason for Double crossing the Pro-invasion faction is that they (the industrial-far right) were not interested in giving Cuba back to Mafia interests and free, independent and prosperous, Spanish-speaking black and Hispanic Catholics. They wanted the war in Vietnam. I also believe that the continued American control of Guantanamo bay was in jeopardy; indeed Guantanamo has never become an issue in all of the intervening years.

This also explains why these same anti-Castro elements showed up at Watergate in 1972 and caused Nixon to soil his shorts. They wanted follow-through on the Cuban invasion.

338

337

336

335

334

333

332

331

330

329

328

Oops

327

326

325

324