Jump to content
The Education Forum

Lyman Lemnitzer


Recommended Posts

Here is a brief of evidence as I understand it that the assassination was carried out at the highhest levels of the military, including Lemay.

-The secure inter governmental and military phone system went out during the assassination, leaving interdepartmental contact difficult.

-The cabinet was in the air at the time, creating a difficulty for chain of command or any notion of stability within the government.

-At any one givn time during the cold war there were 7 bombers in the air on 3 8 hours shifts a day with a payload of nuclear weapons waiting to be dropped at the drop of a hat. When the pilots of these bombers became aware of Kennedy's assassination they rushed to get their command codes, which would tell them what to do in this emergency and would also give them the codes required to drop the bombs. The pilots must have assumed that it was the Soviets that had shot Kennedy and so thought it best that they were prepared to attack. This system was known as the Strategic Air Command, a system designed by general Curtis LeMay. When the pilots on all 7 bombers tried to find their code books, they were gone. The removal of the codebooks could only have come from the top of the chain, as the books needed to go through 17 different sets of hands. The only one who could have had these removed was Curtis Lemay. The reasoning behind was obviously that he knew what was going down in Dallas and did not want others in the military to over react.

-The autopsy of JFK took place at Bethesda, a military hospital. This is crucial in understanding who controlled the cover-up.

-At the time of Kennedy's assassination, the only place that the threat level was raised was in Vietnam, presumably because they knew that they were going to get an influx of troops quite soon.

-John Judge's mother worked for the Pentagon in 1963 and was the highest paid female civilian there at the time, she was 5 levels above top secret. It was her job to make predictions for troop level numbers that would be needed for the next ten years in advance, based on projections made by the joint chiefs of staff. In April of 1963 she was told to accomodate her figures to include a complete withdrawal of U.S. troops from Vietnam by 1964. In late November of 1963 she was presented with new figures by the joint chiefs and told to make predictions for a ten year war in Vietnam that would have casualties of 52,000 american troops. She could not believe the figures that were presented to her and brought them to the joint chiefs to confirm. She was told to change her predictions on the Monday following the assassination of President Kennedy.

We must understand that the CIA receives only 20% of the total intelligence budget, the rest goes to the DIA, Defense Intelligence Agency, which includes the Office of Naval Intelligence, Military Intelligence, Air Force Intelligence and other military intelligence establishments. The CIA is largely a think tank, which formulates plans for the military to act upon. The one thing I notice from pouring over CIA documents is that everybody has a title, everybody is a chief of something. CIA staff in most countries was minimal. If they needed an operation done, they would plan it and hand it over to the military or contract it out to assets.

John

Dang, that is a fine post, other person named John.

Some top notch synthesis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 31
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

...

-John Judge's mother worked for the Pentagon in 1963 and was the highest paid female civilian there at the time, she was 5 levels above top secret. It was her job to make predictions for troop level numbers that would be needed for the next ten years in advance, based on projections made by the joint chiefs of staff. In April of 1963 she was told to accomodate her figures to include a complete withdrawal of U.S. troops from Vietnam by 1964. In late November of 1963 she was presented with new figures by the joint chiefs and told to make predictions for a ten year war in Vietnam that would have casualties of 52,000 american troops. She could not believe the figures that were presented to her and brought them to the joint chiefs to confirm. She was told to change her predictions on the Monday following the assassination of President Kennedy.

...

John

If you could share a source for that info it'd be great John.

...

We must understand that the CIA receives only 20% of the total intelligence budget, the rest goes to the DIA, Defense Intelligence Agency, which includes the Office of Naval Intelligence, Military Intelligence, Air Force Intelligence and other military intelligence establishments. The CIA is largely a think tank, which formulates plans for the military to act upon. The one thing I notice from pouring over CIA documents is that everybody has a title, everybody is a chief of something. CIA staff in most countries was minimal. If they needed an operation done, they would plan it and hand it over to the military or contract it out to assets.

...

John

I would think that since the CIA threw so much business to the military, and gave the military so much justification for its existence, the military would look very favorably on the CIA. Nothing to support this, just seems logical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

-John Judge's mother worked for the Pentagon in 1963 and was the highest paid female civilian there at the time, she was 5 levels above top secret. It was her job to make predictions for troop level numbers that would be needed for the next ten years in advance, based on projections made by the joint chiefs of staff. In April of 1963 she was told to accomodate her figures to include a complete withdrawal of U.S. troops from Vietnam by 1964. In late November of 1963 she was presented with new figures by the joint chiefs and told to make predictions for a ten year war in Vietnam that would have casualties of 52,000 american troops. She could not believe the figures that were presented to her and brought them to the joint chiefs to confirm. She was told to change her predictions on the Monday following the assassination of President Kennedy.

...

John

If you could share a source for that info it'd be great John.

...

We must understand that the CIA receives only 20% of the total intelligence budget, the rest goes to the DIA, Defense Intelligence Agency, which includes the Office of Naval Intelligence, Military Intelligence, Air Force Intelligence and other military intelligence establishments. The CIA is largely a think tank, which formulates plans for the military to act upon. The one thing I notice from pouring over CIA documents is that everybody has a title, everybody is a chief of something. CIA staff in most countries was minimal. If they needed an operation done, they would plan it and hand it over to the military or contract it out to assets.

...

John

I would think that since the CIA threw so much business to the military, and gave the military so much justification for its existence, the military would look very favorably on the CIA. Nothing to support this, just seems logical.

Hi Myra,

As I said in my post, the source for this information is from conversations with John Judge about his mothers work in the pentagon.

All the best,

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Geraghty.

The CIA is the little brother of the Defense Staff,

and the Naval Staff Chief is suspect, since

John F. Kennedy was a former naval officer

and had a long intelligence dossier

that reactionary militants in the defense hierarchy

resented and found objectionable................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lyman L. Lemnitzer,

General, United States Army

b. 29 Aug 1899, d. 12 November 1988

Born in Honesdale, Pennsylvania, August 29, 1899.

Died November 12, 1988.

General Lemnitzer was an Eisenhower appointee and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the Kennedy administration. A leading proponent of pre-emptive action against Cuba during the Cuban Missile Crisis, Lemnitzer believed that the United States had to destroy Cuba and the Soviet Union before it lost its strategic advantage in the missile gap that secretly was tilted heavily in favor of America, though the media was being fed the opposite message.

From released KGB documents and meetings between Robert McNamara and Castro during the 1990s, it is now known that Lemnitzer was wrong and warheads were actually in place during the crisis. A preemptive strike would have resulted in mass US casualties. Kennedy's gut instinct was correct. However, Lemnitzer secretly harbored a deep resentment of Kennedy after the crisis ended, believing the president had missed a golden opportunity to permanently rid the world of the communist-atheists.

When the CIA's Operation Mongoose was canceled due to repeated failures, The Cuba Project was created within the Pentagon to continue these types of activities. Lemnitzer relished the opportunity to show up the "company" who he believed was treading on the military's solomn black ops ground, and ineffectively at that. This led him to approve Operation Northwoods, the plans to attack US targets and blame it on Castro to create a pretext for a complete US invasion of Cuba, and potentially a definitive (at least in Lemnitzer's eyes) WWIII scenario with the Russians. Revealingly, his chairmanship was not renewed and he was sent off to command U.S. forces in Europe.

Prior to the Kennedy assassination, Lemnitzer had been implicated in an investigation into extreme right-wing and anti-communist/pro-Israel hardliner connections in the Defense Department which had already forced the resignation of several Pentagon officials, including one who'd been caught handing out John Birch Society literature while on assignment overseas. The conclusions called for further extensive investigation of Lemnitzer to determine just how far his connections ran, but these were never carried out. This has led some to suspect a DoD, rather than CIA, involvement in the death of JFK. Ironically (or not), in 1975 the retired General Lemnitzer was appointed by Gerald R. Ford to the Commission on CIA Activities within the United States. (my italics)

source: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title...an_L._Lemnitzer 4apr2006

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

Edited by Mark Stapleton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Myra,

As I said in my post, the source for this information is from conversations with John Judge about his mothers work in the pentagon.

All the best,

John

Oh gosh, how ever could I have missed the statement that the information is from conversations with John Judge?

Hmm, still missing it. Where exactly in your post did you state that John?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see a basic contradiction in the idea that Lemnitzer and others in the military wanted to launch a pre-emptive strike against the Soviet Union in the early 1960s. The Russians served the MIC well as a bogeyman for the many long years of the Cold War. When the Soviet Union finally collapsed, there was no bogeyman already in place to immediately replace the Russians. It took a while to develop the militant Islamic fundamentalists, personified in Bin Laden, as the new bogeyman, good for decades to come if not till Armageddon. So I find it difficult to understand why Lemnitzer and others wanted to kill off the golden goose right away by obliterating Russia back in the 1960s. I realize that the cost in U.S. casualties in a nuclear exchange meant nothing to them, but what would the MIC then have done without Russia?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, hidden somewhere in the vast depths of the Forum, is a thread I started on Lemnitzer, LeMay and Lems sidekick Craig, with special emphasis on the enmity that existed between the Kennedy Administration, and the JCS. I'll see if I cant dig it out.

Lemnitzer and LeMay are prime suspects. If there is a list of the

"military brass" at the JFK autopsy "who seemed to be in charge"

and "dictating to the autopists", I'd bet they were there. It the

operation was a military coup, their hands were unclean...all the JCS.

Jack

Agreed. Lemnitzer and LeMay are prime suspects.

In fact they and the joint chiefs should be looked at as closely as the CIA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 years later...

Mr. Simkin - if you are reading this the link to the thread on LeMay doesn't work. Why?

Mark Stapleton - you posted a bio of Lemnitzer with a link. Have you found, or does anyone have, info on Lemnitzer being investigated for right wing ties? Does anyone know of ties between Lemnitzer and Walker, the unnamed general in your link?

I think this is a good place to bring up the recent discovery of more intact AF 1 tapes from Nov.22, 1963. I was very curious about the aide to General LeMay that was on board that flight from Dallas to DC. He was apparently trying persistently to get in touch with LeMay, who was on another flight. Clearly he wasn't trying to inform him of JFK's death. So what was he doing? The other thing I gleaned from reading transcripts of the recording was that the autopsy location was changed mid-flight. I did read something more recently that suggests that wasn't true, so if someone knows about this I would appreciate the correction. Assuming that my info on the change of autopsy location is correct, could it be that this was the message LeMay's aide was trying to relay? There is some evidence that LeMay was at the autopsy, but his name does not appear on any official list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted Earlier

I see a basic contradiction in the idea that Lemnitzer and others in the military wanted to launch a pre-emptive strike against the Soviet Union in the early 1960s. The Russians served the MIC well as a bogeyman for the many long years of the Cold War. When the Soviet Union finally collapsed, there was no bogeyman already in place to immediately replace the Russians. It took a while to develop the militant Islamic fundamentalists, personified in Bin Laden, as the new bogeyman, good for decades to come if not till Armageddon. So I find it difficult to understand why Lemnitzer and others wanted to kill off the golden goose right away by obliterating Russia back in the 1960s. I realize that the cost in U.S. casualties in a nuclear exchange meant nothing to them, but what would the MIC then have done without Russia?

My answer would be that the desire on the part of the Pentagon hierarchy to utterly destroy the Soviets is well documented in House of War, the author is the son of the late James Carroll, who was the first director of the Defense Intelligence Agency and was not too happy about the assassination of President Kennedy. It is hard to read the book and not surmise that James Carroll and his son both had suspicions about the character, or lack thereof, of General LeMay. As the author is James P. Carroll's son, reading the book is not unlike the book In The Boat with LBJ, written by the son of J. Waddy Bullion, an LBJ attorney, in the sense that both sons by no means wore rose colored lenses with regards to the possibility or even probability of conspiracy.

But to get back to the concept of why the Pentagon was not reticent about no longer having to deal with "Godless communism, of the Bolshevik variety, east of Germany, in the words of Charlie Sheen......."winning."

I have been reading House of War for several weeks, it is in my view the most important book about U.S. Military history in the 20th Century, not only that has been written, but will ever be written. I have never said that about any book I have ever read in my entire life. It literally exposes the fact that the post-World War II mindset in America both politically and militarily, as having no scruples whatsoever in risking a nuclear exchange, I could go on and on; as a added feature the chronology covered includes the administration of George W. Bush, in as much detail as the era of the Truman/Eisenhower/JFK era from 1945-1963.

Regarding Lyman Lemnitzer the following is from a very detailed segment of

Executive Privilege - Two Centurys of White House Scandals - Jack Mitchell

He is basically summing up a less than flattering scandal of the JFK Administration, but it is not done in the extreme character assassination of say, a book like Reckless Youth or The Dark Side of Camelot. In other words he is even-handed and the negatives are more in conjunction with the less flattering aspects of the JFK Administration that John F. Kennedy, the man.

When reading below remember this book was released in 1992

With regard to Lemnitzer, Mitchell wrote....

The president faced a much worse problem at the Pentagon. The award of the biggest military plane contract in history gave rise to political double-dealing and bureaucratic lying which would stretch on for years and cost the taxpayers perhaps hundreds of millions of dollars. "TFX" were initials which became almost as famous as the president's for a time. They stood for a line of air force and navy fighter planes whose development and construction contracts totaled $6.5 billion dollars, a plum which could keep any major defense contractor's plants humming for a decade or more.

The coveted prize was urgently sought by two giants of the defense industry, Boeing and General Dynamics. The immensely profitable bottom line made the award much more than a routine procurement, which is why Pulitzer-Prize winning journalist Clark Mollenhoff devoted months to the unfolding story. Thousands of present and future jobs were at stake, and powerful politicians lined up behind the companies, each hoping to have a hand in directing the government's largesse to his home area. Since this single decision would commit the Defense Department to an entire generation of fighter planes, the Pentagon's planners had exhaustive studies performed to match the Boeing blueprints and test models against General Dynamics.

Rumors of behind-the scenes political pressure being applied from Texas surfaced during the months before the final award was made, but few on Capitol Hill took the warnings seriously. Nothing seemed amiss when Pentagon spokesmen announced in November 1962 that General Dynamics had won out. That choice sent shock waves through the Defense Department, however; knowledgeable military analysts knew that all their internal studies had showed Boeing's to be the better cheaper plane by far.

Seattle-based Boeing's champion, Washington Senator Henry Jackson, was told privately that four different studies had ended with the same verdict: Boeing's planes were superior, and their price was as much as $400 million dollars lower than General Dynamics'. The influential "Scoop" Jackson sicced his crack investigative staff on the Pentagon planners and soon learned that internal documents proved what the critics had told him off-the-record--even the Pentagon source selection board, composed of non-partisan experts, had chosen Boeing. Further sleuthing, uncovered the fact that the bespectacled, intellectual secretary of Defense, former whiz-kid Robert McNamara, had signed off on the controversial award for reasons which appeared to be almost nonsensical under close scrutiny. The slick-haired McNamara had earned a well deserved reputation for being a determined, if not savage, cost-cutter as a bigwig at General Motors. Why would he permit the virtually unanimous recommendations of his own blue-ribbon plans to be ignored?

Disturbingly, Senate accountants found major errors in the documentation which McNamara had submitted in support of his decision. Classified data confirmed the growing suspicions; political influence or outright incompetence was at the bottom of this overturned rock. Hard pressed by a usually fawning press corps, Kennedy assured questioners that McNamara had acted in the taxpayer's interest.

As it turned out that wasn't true, nor was it all the tightly wrapped defense chief's fault. Two of his top subordinates had grossly violated conflict-of-interest laws which the president himself had instituted to prevent money-grubbing in high-office, conflicts which had humiliated Eisenhower frequently. One of the culprits was McNamara's chief aide, Deputy Secretary of Defense Roswell Gilpatric. In and out of the revolving door between industry and government for years, the New York lawyer's firm

had served as counsel to General Dynamics, which was in dire financial straits and desperately needed the TFX bonanza to avoid having to flirt with bankruptcy. Blithely ignoring the new ethics rules, Gilpatric, a key player in the TFX decision, convinced his boss to overrule the recommendations of no less than four selection boards, which were all in favor of Boeing, and grant approval instead to the more costly General Dynamic's plane. Gilpatric then shamelessly pushed congressional committees for an immediate signing of the controversial contract, before the deal could be closely examined. The conflict-of-interest was even more serious in the case of the second McNamara lieutenant, Navy Secretary, Fred Korth, a Fort Worth banker and crony of Vice-President Lyndon Johnson. Korth's bank had loaned money to General Dynamics, and that should have raised a red flag right there. Like Gilpatric, Korth recommended that millions of dollars worth of in-depth analysis be ignored. Unlike his Pentagon ally, however Korth had the abysmally bad judgement to allow lobbyists for General Dynamics to visit his Pentagon office frequently during the months when the TFX contract was under completion. To top it off, Korth repeatedly wrote letters on official navy stationery promoting the bank's business, after claiming he had severed the relationship. He'd also taken his bank's customers for rides on the navy's yacht Sequoia, congressional staffers discovered.

These embarrassing revelations forced the White House to seek Korth's resignation, which he tendered with the face-saving explanation that he had to attend to "pressing business affairs." Even then, Kennedy's aides disingenuously sought to defuse the departure by leaking a story that Korth was quitting over a policy dispute, on an unrelated matter. Gilpatric stayed at his post for a while, then left the government to rejoin his law-firm. Despite the flap, the iron-willed McNamara stuck to his original, unpopular decision to allow General Dynamics to build the planes. Years later, in the Johnson administration, it would become painfully apparent that the TFX boondoggle had more than doubled the cost to the taxpayers.

Robert: There is something of a follow-up to this episode, which concerns Fred Korth and some other sordid details

see my post entitled Navy League in Puerto Rico on May 1, 1963

http://educationforu...showtopic=18911

Edited by Robert Howard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert, I know it was just a typo on your part; The first DIA Director was Joseph Carroll, not James. As you know, James was the son.

Joseph Carroll's New York Times obituary: http://www.nytimes.c...nce-agency.html

Excerpt:

General Carroll, an Air Force officer who was involved in national security affairs for 30 years, headed the Defense Intelligence Agency from its creation in 1961 until he retired in 1969. The agency was intended as a special unit to coordinate the intelligence activities of the separate services.

Before that, he was inspector general of the Air Force and conducted investigations of suspected security violations, including the 1960 defection to the Soviet Union of two employees of the National Security Agency.

Edited by Michael Hogan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
Guest Robert Morrow

Referring to Lyndon Johnson's schedule in early November, 1963.

Lyndon Johnson is in Texas at the end of October, 1963. Then in early November:

"The Vice President returned to the capital city on Saturday afternoon November 2, and the next morning he was airborne en route to the Benelux countries."

Can I be speculative here? Just a theory, running it by you.

Ok. Why is Lyndon Johnson on Sunday, November 3, heading to the Benelux countries? LBJ is under tremendous pressure at home; he is engaged in a sub rosa war with the Kennedys. The Bobby Baker scandal is blooming (Baker named 2 of his children after Lyndon Johnson). LBJ is fully aware the Kennedys are out for every drop of his political blood.

So it is not like LBJ was sent on a mission to Europe by JFK... because the Kennedys are in the process of slitting his throat. LBJ and JFK spent exactly 2 hours of time together alone in 1963. LBJ was excluded by the Kennedys in the making of plans for the Texas trip.

Lyndon Johnson is making a quick Sunday trip to Benelux on his own accord.

Is he going to NATO to see Gen. Lemnitzer to ask for special favors? Is Gen. Lemnitzer saying something like, I will take time out from all my Gladio destabilization programs and I will arrange to have Gen. Edward Lansdale in Dallas on 11/22/63 to make sure there is a bullet put in JFK's head?

Imaginary conversation from Lemnitzer "I hate him (JFK). LeMay hates him. You hate him. We know the Kennedys are out to destroy you. Dulles hates him. The man is a traitor, an appeaser and a threat to US national security. And don't get me started on his ______ brother. If you can assure an open motorcade in Dallas, we will take care of the rest. Lansdale can handle it."

Then after a day or two in Benelux, LBJ heads straight back to Texas where he awaits for the beloved Kennedys, who have plans to drain every drop of his political blood.

What do you guys think of my theory on the JFK assassination?

Edited by Robert Morrow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Morrow: "So it is not like LBJ was sent on a mission to Europe by JFK." "Lyndon Johnson is making a quick Sunday trip to Benelux on his own accord."

Would Johnson be allowed to visit a foreign country without administration approval and a plausible diplomatic cover story?

Johnson's European trips have been sources of speculation before (e. g. Soviet contact). What were the ostensible reasons for these trips?

Edited by David Andrews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Robert Morrow

Morrow: "So it is not like LBJ was sent on a mission to Europe by JFK." "Lyndon Johnson is making a quick Sunday trip to Benelux on his own accord."

Would Johnson be allowed to visit a foreign country without administration approval and a plausible diplomatic cover story?

Johnson's European trips have been sources of speculation before (e. g. Soviet contact). What were the ostensible reasons for these trips?

I don't know LBJ's cover story for going over there. It was a business trip - and a quick one. [Correction - see Tom Scully's post below. LBJ left DC on Nov. 3rd and came back on Nov. 8th] Lyndon Johnson only did stuff he had to and was in his personal interest - that is his life pattern. I do know this - he was not doing anything for the Kennedys because they were at war with LBJ and all the insiders knew this Nixon, the military guys, DC insiders, etc.

Maybe he was putting a lid on the Eugene Dinkin situation which was breaking at this time: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=7078

Notice that Dinkin discovered a plot to murder JFK on November 2nd! LBJ heads to Europe the next day on a Sunday.

Edited by Robert Morrow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Tom Scully

Morrow: "So it is not like LBJ was sent on a mission to Europe by JFK." "Lyndon Johnson is making a quick Sunday trip to Benelux on his own accord."

Would Johnson be allowed to visit a foreign country without administration approval and a plausible diplomatic cover story?

Johnson's European trips have been sources of speculation before (e. g. Soviet contact). What were the ostensible reasons for these trips?

I don't know LBJ's cover story for going over there. It was a business trip - and a quick one. Lyndon Johnson only did stuff he had to and was in his personal interest - that is his life pattern. I do know this - he was not doing anything for the Kennedys because they were at war with LBJ and all the insiders knew this Nixon, the military guys, DC insiders, etc.

Maybe he was putting a lid on the Eugene Dinkin situation which was breaking at this time: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=7078

Notice that Dinkin discovered a plot to murder JFK on November 2nd! LBJ heads to Europe the next day on a Sunday.

Two obsessions, absolutely no self awareness, and one of the most prolific posters on the internet. Outrageous and a menace to the overall image

of "the community." Posts for the sake of posting. All hat, not cattle. The backs of our necks are meer hydrants in your wake.

Freeman Plans to Visit Europe for Trade Talks

New York Times - Oct 2, 1963

WASHINGTON, Oct. 1 (UPI)-Oiville L. Freeman, Secretary of Agriculture, will go to Amsterdam next month as part of a major American effort to spur increased ....

LBJEuropeNov1936.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...