Jump to content
The Education Forum

Valkyrie at Dealey Plaza


Recommended Posts

“Butch” Griswold was a popular deputy commander, possessing far more people skills than “Tommy” Power " HUMANELY IMPOSSIBLE!!!!!!

"Their wives marveled at the mutually taciturn

airmen whose friendship seemed based more upon mental telepathy tha conversation." Who said there was no checks and balances in Omaha!

No seriously folks, this is very interesting in terms of Richard Rhodes comments that SAC possessed some degree of autonomy within the air force on the ability to launch a nuclear first strike and also independence from presidentS.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 150
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

LeMay Chairs Joint Chiefs Meeting briefed on Covert Cuban Ops-

JFKcountercoup: LeMay Chairs the Joint Chiefs of Staff

THE WHITE HOUSE DIARY SEPTEMBER 23 1963: JFK Signs Executive Order “PresidentKennedy assigns the highest national priority to Project FOUR LEAVES to developand produce a military communications system.”

“SUBJECT: Assignment of Highest National Security Priorityto Project FOUR LEAVES” http://www.jfklibrary.org/WhiteHouse...September/23.htm

“In response to a recommendation by the Secretary of Defense, the president,under the authority granted by the Defense Production Act of 1950, todayestablished the program listed below as being in the highest national securitypriority category for development and production.”

On September 24, Lee Harvey Oswald left his New Orleans apartment for Mexico City.

On September 25, 1963 "Secretary of Defense Robert S.McNamara and Gen. Maxwell D. Taylor, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,arrived in Saigon to investigate what effect the political problems in SouthVietnam have had on the military situation."

Nathan Raab, owner of the Clifton AF1 Radio Tapes, on theRaab Collection Web site, notes: “LeMay, himself a member of the Joint Chiefs, wasin the habit of taking bullying command of Joint Chiefs meetings, and withLeMay leading the charge for war, the other chiefs jumped into the fray,repeating the Air Force general’s call for immediate military action.”

September 25, 1963 Joint Chiefs of Staff Memo for theRecord, Walter Higgins, Briefing by Mr. Desmond Fitzgerald on CIACuban Operations and Planning, JFK Collection, (JCS Papers, J-3,#29 NARA. Riff202-10001-10028)

[http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...amp;relPageId=5]

This meeting and the memo of what occurred there is important in regards to theassassination of President Kennedy for a number of reasons. For starters, thismemo shows that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff - Gen. Taylor, waspreoccupied with Vietnamand not even at this important meeting on Cuban operations, and that in hisplace, Air Force General Curts LeMay assumed the chair. In this role, itis quite apparent that Gen. LeMay also played a significant role in themilitary's assistance to the CIA and theanti-Castro Cuban maritime operations, especially the ones connected to theassassination by way of the missions of the Rex and the Collins Radio coverthey used.

In addition, it gives us the Pentagon office responsible forcoordinating military assistance to the CIA’scovert anti-Cuban maritime operations - the Pentagon Office of the SpecialAssistant for Counterinsurgency and Special Activities (SACASP), and itsdirector - Gen. Krulak, who we previously knew from Col. Fletcher Prouty.

While LeMay and the Air Force at first balked at giving anysupport to the CIA maritime operations,other than training, LeMay then offered to run thementirely under the control of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS). When it wasexplained to LeMay that the role of the JCS is to form strategy and assist inshaping policy, operational matters are handled by others - in this case TaskForce Alpha,

The biggest threat, according to the CIAbriefer, Desmond FitzGerald, was the possibility of the Cubans capturing amother ship, like the Rex, interrogating the crew and confiscating the sensitiveelectronic equipment and any possible records that might be aboard. It would belike another Pueblo incident whenthe North Koreans captured the American electronics spy ship and held the crewhostage.

LeMay doesn't seem to understand the capabilities ofsmall motorboats, and dismisses the possibility of them becoming a threat,which shows you how he would fail to recognize the threat of such boats in Cuba,Vietnam and thepirate waters off Africa today.

LeMay does put a lot of credence in the radio programsand operations, and suggests that a project Air Force officer McElroy was workingon might be worthwhile for the CIA toconsider using in Cuba.

Besides mentioning that they were studying the Valkyrie - Hitler assassinationplot to use against Castro, FitzGerald also mentions that the number and typesof targets are limited, and even if they attack two to four a month, within a few months they will have exhausted suchtargets. They only refer to oil, electricity, sugar and military targets, withno real mention of Cuban leaders, and only five missions were planned for thefall of 1963.

General Krulak was given responsibility for ensuring that the military suppliesthe CIA with all it needs in regards tosupport for the Cuban maritime raiders.

Then after the meeting, Adml. Riley read a letter from McGeorge Bundy/ RoswellGilpatrick that was to be returned to Gilpatrick, that apparently concerns thesecurity of Cuban operations, and Higgins, the author of the memo, says that hewill check “Pendulum,” which is "in being," to see if it is adequate.

The relevant JCS meeting memo in its entirety:

OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL ASSISTANT FOR

COUNTERINSURGENCY AND SPECIAL ACTIVITY(SACASP)

25 September 1963

MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD

Subject: Briefing by Mr. Desmond FitzGerald on

CIA Cuban Operations and Planning

1. At the JCS meeting at 1400 on 25 September, Mr. Desmond FitzGerald briefedthe Joint Chiefs of Staff.

2. Except for General Taylor and Admiral McDonald, the Joint Chiefs werepresent, as were the Directors and Secretariat. Colonel Higgins from SACSA wasthe only other officer in attendance.

3. General LeMay opened the meeting by referring to papers recently discussedby the Joint Chiefs on policy and actions concerning military support of the CIAfor operations against Cuba.General LeMay expressed the JCS position as had been reflected in the memorandato Mr. Vance which in effect is that the Joint Chiefs do not believe that theoperations to date are of a size and importance enough to justify the use ofmilitary support for protection.

4. Mr. FitzGerald then discussed his personal feelings as to changed conditionsin Cuba.Essentially, he believes that Castro's hold in Cubahas been seriously weakened since last July. He believes that the minor raidsconducted by the CIA have contributed tothis deterioration in Castro's influence and stability. He is firmly convincedthat Castro will fall at some future, not too distant, date, and that suchactions as the CIA are conducting, as wellas those of exiles, are contributing to unrest and unsettlement.

5. Mr. FitzGerald, in commenting upon criteria as to when the military supportshould be provided, offered the following. The greatest danger from his pointof view is that the mother ships may be captured rather than be sunk. This willresult in the capture of crewmen who have too much information and which couldresult in dangerous publicity for the United States. The location of these raidscontributes to the possibility of capture. Hence, only when the raids areconducted in the more vulnerable areas from that point of view, is it likelythat the CIA will request military support.He further stated that CIA has no intentionof requesting aid for the coming raid.

6. General LeMay questioned the danger of capture in view of the capabilitiesof Cubans and ridiculed the idea that small motor boats should have thecapability of such a ship.

7. General LeMay and others gave opinions concerning such technicalities as thecapability of radar both on land and in the air, capability of ship radar ofthe U.S. and Cuba,the speed of the mother ship, which was cited as 10 to 12 knots, and otherrelated items.

8. Mr. FitzGerald made much of the Cuban volatile nature. He cited that manyCubans are now walking with their heads up and alert because of the realizationthat there are possibilities of raids and other outside supports, such as thelight aircraft raids. He voiced the opinion that Castro would probably takedesperate measures as his situation further deteriorates and would turn tocreating revolutions in Latin America. He stated thateven though his operations may be considered only minor, he thought they weredoing about as much as could be done under the present policies. One of hisproblems was that he felt there was only a total of 50 logical targets and ifhe conducted as many as 10 raids a month, he would be unable to sustain thebuild-up of Cuban hopes. He further stated that there were times when certaintypes of raids were more favorable than others; for instance, on sugarcentrals.

9. In responding to the question concerning the non-attributality of U.S.equipment, he stated that all equipment they use could be bought on the openmarket in many countries, even though it was of American origin. He stated thatintelligence was not as good yet as they would like to have; however, they arehaving greater success in having agents enter and depart Cuba.

10. General Wheeler injected that he sympathizes with such planners as Mr.FitzGerald because he realizes that many good ideas are never accepted by thecautious policy makers. However, Mr. FitzGerald reported that he believes hehad a clearer go-ahead on these operations than he has ever had in his pastexperience.

11. Mr. FitzGerald said that over the next two or three months his plansinclude critical targets of three classes: electrical systems, sugar centrals,and oil. He cited that electrical systems, although a top priority and a key tothe economy, were very difficult targets. The sugar centrals were only of aseasonal nature because unless hit at the peak season, they could be repairedwithout difficulty or loss of time. In regard to oil, the refineries are mostimportant but were also toughest to hit.

12. In response to a comment by General Shoup regarding the sabotage of minesMr. FitzGerald said there had been a recent case of internal sabotage in amine. He then explained how the success of his operations can only be measuredwhen internal sabotage is increased. In response to a question, he admittedthat there was not any coordination as yet with the internal sabotageprogram.

13. He commented that there was nothing new in the propaganda field. However,he felt that there had been great success in getting closer to the militarypersonnel who might break with Castro, and stated that there were at least tenhigh-level military personnel who are talking with CIAbut as yet are not talking to each other, since that degree of confidence hasnot yet developed. He considers it as a parallel in history; i.e., the plot tokill Hitler; and this plot is being studied in detail to develop an approach.

14. General LeMay then questioned the advisability of utilizing a communicationtechnique to install a radio capability which would permit break-in on Castrobroadcasts. He stated that an Air Force officer named McElroy was available totalk to Mr. FitzGerald on the matter, and Mr. FitzGerald accepted this offer.

15. The conference closed with General LeMay directing that Mr. FitzGerald'splanners meet with General Krulak's people and work out the details as to howthe military can assist in supporting these operations. After Mr. FitzGeralddeparted, General LeMay gave added directions to Colonel Higgins to initiatenecessary steps for planning.

16. After the JCS meeting Admiral Riley called Colonel Higgins into his officeand read a letter from Mr. McGeorge Bundy which discussed secrecy measuresnecessary related to Cuba CIA operations.Admiral Riley directed Colonel Higgins to have the nature of this letter putout through SACSA control to SACSA contact points to insure an adequate systemfor secrecy within the military services. Admiral Riley stated he was returningthe letter to Mr. Gilpatric as he did not want written communication by SACSA,but to put this out orally. This was transmitted to Colonel Wyman who will takethe action to prepare an appropriate memorandum for the record to be filed withGeneral Ingelido in accordance with further direction by Admiral Riley.

17. General Wheeler, Chief of Staff of the Army, called and questioned usconcerning SACSA's access for the knowledge of such operations as mentioned inthe McGeorge Bundy letter. I advised him that our Pendulum system was in beingbut that I would look into it in greater detail to determine that it met the letteras well as the spirit of the memorandum. I stated I believed this was so buthad not had reason to do it until this date and therefore did not give him apositive answer at that time.

WALTER M. HIGGINS, JR.

Colonel, USA

Link to post
Share on other sites

LeMay Chairs Joint Chiefs Meeting briefed on Covert Cuban Ops -

JFKcountercoup: LeMay Chairs the Joint Chiefs of Staff

THE WHITE HOUSE DIARY SEPTEMBER 23 1963: JFK Signs Executive Order “PresidentKennedy assigns the highest national priority to Project FOUR LEAVES to developand produce a military communications system.”

“SUBJECT: Assignment of Highest National Security Priorityto Project FOUR LEAVES” http://www.jfklibrary.org/WhiteHouse...September/23.htm

“In response to a recommendation by the Secretary of Defense, the president,under the authority granted by the Defense Production Act of 1950, todayestablished the program listed below as being in the highest national securitypriority category for development and production.”

On September 24, Lee Harvey Oswald left his New Orleans apartment for Mexico City.

On September 25, 1963 "Secretary of Defense Robert S.McNamara and Gen. Maxwell D. Taylor, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,arrived in Saigon to investigate what effect the political problems in SouthVietnam have had on the military situation."

Nathan Raab, owner of the Clifton AF1 Radio Tapes, on theRaab Collection Web site, notes: “LeMay, himself a member of the Joint Chiefs, wasin the habit of taking bullying command of Joint Chiefs meetings, and withLeMay leading the charge for war, the other chiefs jumped into the fray,repeating the Air Force general’s call for immediate military action.”

September 25, 1963 Joint Chiefs of Staff Memo for theRecord, Walter Higgins, Briefing by Mr. Desmond Fitzgerald on CIACuban Operations and Planning, JFK Collection, (JCS Papers, J-3,#29 NARA. Riff202-10001-10028)

[http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...amp;relPageId=5]

This meeting and the memo of what occurred there is important in regards to theassassination of President Kennedy for a number of reasons. For starters, thismemo shows that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff - Gen. Taylor, waspreoccupied with Vietnamand not even at this important meeting on Cuban operations, and that in hisplace, Air Force General Curts LeMay assumed the chair. In this role, itis quite apparent that Gen. LeMay also played a significant role in themilitary's assistance to the CIA and theanti-Castro Cuban maritime operations, especially the ones connected to theassassination by way of the missions of the Rex and the Collins Radio coverthey used.

In addition, it gives us the Pentagon office responsible forcoordinating military assistance to the CIA’scovert anti-Cuban maritime operations - the Pentagon Office of the SpecialAssistant for Counterinsurgency and Special Activities (SACASP), and itsdirector - Gen. Krulak, who we previously knew from Col. Fletcher Prouty.

While LeMay and the Air Force at first balked at giving anysupport to the CIA maritime operations,other than training, LeMay then offered to run thementirely under the control of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS). When it wasexplained to LeMay that the role of the JCS is to form strategy and assist inshaping policy, operational matters are handled by others - in this case TaskForce Alpha,

The biggest threat, according to the CIAbriefer, Desmond FitzGerald, was the possibility of the Cubans capturing amother ship, like the Rex, interrogating the crew and confiscating the sensitiveelectronic equipment and any possible records that might be aboard. It would belike another Pueblo incident whenthe North Koreans captured the American electronics spy ship and held the crewhostage.

LeMay doesn't seem to understand the capabilities ofsmall motorboats, and dismisses the possibility of them becoming a threat,which shows you how he would fail to recognize the threat of such boats in Cuba,Vietnam and thepirate waters off Africa today.

LeMay does put a lot of credence in the radio programsand operations, and suggests that a project Air Force officer McElroy was workingon might be worthwhile for the CIA toconsider using in Cuba.

Besides mentioning that they were studying the Valkyrie - Hitler assassinationplot to use against Castro, FitzGerald also mentions that the number and typesof targets are limited, and even if they attack two to four a month, within a few months they will have exhausted suchtargets. They only refer to oil, electricity, sugar and military targets, withno real mention of Cuban leaders, and only five missions were planned for thefall of 1963.

General Krulak was given responsibility for ensuring that the military suppliesthe CIA with all it needs in regards tosupport for the Cuban maritime raiders.

Then after the meeting, Adml. Riley read a letter from McGeorge Bundy/ RoswellGilpatrick that was to be returned to Gilpatrick, that apparently concerns thesecurity of Cuban operations, and Higgins, the author of the memo, says that hewill check “Pendulum,” which is "in being," to see if it is adequate.

The relevant JCS meeting memo in its entirety:

OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL ASSISTANT FOR

COUNTERINSURGENCY AND SPECIAL ACTIVITY(SACASP)

25 September 1963

MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD

Subject: Briefing by Mr. Desmond FitzGerald on

CIA Cuban Operations and Planning

1. At the JCS meeting at 1400 on 25 September, Mr. Desmond FitzGerald briefedthe Joint Chiefs of Staff.

2. Except for General Taylor and Admiral McDonald, the Joint Chiefs werepresent, as were the Directors and Secretariat. Colonel Higgins from SACSA wasthe only other officer in attendance.

3. General LeMay opened the meeting by referring to papers recently discussedby the Joint Chiefs on policy and actions concerning military support of the CIAfor operations against Cuba.General LeMay expressed the JCS position as had been reflected in the memorandato Mr. Vance which in effect is that the Joint Chiefs do not believe that theoperations to date are of a size and importance enough to justify the use ofmilitary support for protection.

4. Mr. FitzGerald then discussed his personal feelings as to changed conditionsin Cuba.Essentially, he believes that Castro's hold in Cubahas been seriously weakened since last July. He believes that the minor raidsconducted by the CIA have contributed tothis deterioration in Castro's influence and stability. He is firmly convincedthat Castro will fall at some future, not too distant, date, and that suchactions as the CIA are conducting, as wellas those of exiles, are contributing to unrest and unsettlement.

5. Mr. FitzGerald, in commenting upon criteria as to when the military supportshould be provided, offered the following. The greatest danger from his pointof view is that the mother ships may be captured rather than be sunk. This willresult in the capture of crewmen who have too much information and which couldresult in dangerous publicity for the United States. The location of these raidscontributes to the possibility of capture. Hence, only when the raids areconducted in the more vulnerable areas from that point of view, is it likelythat the CIA will request military support.He further stated that CIA has no intentionof requesting aid for the coming raid.

6. General LeMay questioned the danger of capture in view of the capabilitiesof Cubans and ridiculed the idea that small motor boats should have thecapability of such a ship.

7. General LeMay and others gave opinions concerning such technicalities as thecapability of radar both on land and in the air, capability of ship radar ofthe U.S. and Cuba,the speed of the mother ship, which was cited as 10 to 12 knots, and otherrelated items.

8. Mr. FitzGerald made much of the Cuban volatile nature. He cited that manyCubans are now walking with their heads up and alert because of the realizationthat there are possibilities of raids and other outside supports, such as thelight aircraft raids. He voiced the opinion that Castro would probably takedesperate measures as his situation further deteriorates and would turn tocreating revolutions in Latin America. He stated thateven though his operations may be considered only minor, he thought they weredoing about as much as could be done under the present policies. One of hisproblems was that he felt there was only a total of 50 logical targets and ifhe conducted as many as 10 raids a month, he would be unable to sustain thebuild-up of Cuban hopes. He further stated that there were times when certaintypes of raids were more favorable than others; for instance, on sugarcentrals.

9. In responding to the question concerning the non-attributality of U.S.equipment, he stated that all equipment they use could be bought on the openmarket in many countries, even though it was of American origin. He stated thatintelligence was not as good yet as they would like to have; however, they arehaving greater success in having agents enter and depart Cuba.

10. General Wheeler injected that he sympathizes with such planners as Mr.FitzGerald because he realizes that many good ideas are never accepted by thecautious policy makers. However, Mr. FitzGerald reported that he believes hehad a clearer go-ahead on these operations than he has ever had in his pastexperience.

11. Mr. FitzGerald said that over the next two or three months his plansinclude critical targets of three classes: electrical systems, sugar centrals,and oil. He cited that electrical systems, although a top priority and a key tothe economy, were very difficult targets. The sugar centrals were only of aseasonal nature because unless hit at the peak season, they could be repairedwithout difficulty or loss of time. In regard to oil, the refineries are mostimportant but were also toughest to hit.

12. In response to a comment by General Shoup regarding the sabotage of minesMr. FitzGerald said there had been a recent case of internal sabotage in amine. He then explained how the success of his operations can only be measuredwhen internal sabotage is increased. In response to a question, he admittedthat there was not any coordination as yet with the internal sabotageprogram.

13. He commented that there was nothing new in the propaganda field. However,he felt that there had been great success in getting closer to the militarypersonnel who might break with Castro, and stated that there were at least tenhigh-level military personnel who are talking with CIAbut as yet are not talking to each other, since that degree of confidence hasnot yet developed. He considers it as a parallel in history; i.e., the plot tokill Hitler; and this plot is being studied in detail to develop an approach.

14. General LeMay then questioned the advisability of utilizing a communicationtechnique to install a radio capability which would permit break-in on Castrobroadcasts. He stated that an Air Force officer named McElroy was available totalk to Mr. FitzGerald on the matter, and Mr. FitzGerald accepted this offer.

15. The conference closed with General LeMay directing that Mr. FitzGerald'splanners meet with General Krulak's people and work out the details as to howthe military can assist in supporting these operations. After Mr. FitzGeralddeparted, General LeMay gave added directions to Colonel Higgins to initiatenecessary steps for planning.

16. After the JCS meeting Admiral Riley called Colonel Higgins into his officeand read a letter from Mr. McGeorge Bundy which discussed secrecy measuresnecessary related to Cuba CIA operations.Admiral Riley directed Colonel Higgins to have the nature of this letter putout through SACSA control to SACSA contact points to insure an adequate systemfor secrecy within the military services. Admiral Riley stated he was returningthe letter to Mr. Gilpatric as he did not want written communication by SACSA,but to put this out orally. This was transmitted to Colonel Wyman who will takethe action to prepare an appropriate memorandum for the record to be filed withGeneral Ingelido in accordance with further direction by Admiral Riley.

17. General Wheeler, Chief of Staff of the Army, called and questioned usconcerning SACSA's access for the knowledge of such operations as mentioned inthe McGeorge Bundy letter. I advised him that our Pendulum system was in beingbut that I would look into it in greater detail to determine that it met the letteras well as the spirit of the memorandum. I stated I believed this was so buthad not had reason to do it until this date and therefore did not give him apositive answer at that time.

WALTER M. HIGGINS, JR.

Colonel, USA

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...

Your article , in my opinion, is an example of how it is hard to separate the writers secondary opinions from the data presented.

most independent researchers eventually recognize that the Cuban angles are the key to understanding the crime.

Now what does that mean? That adds no truth to the matter, if it is indeed correct.

If that statement is correct all it means is that most people are wrong.

I would like to point out to you that Castro is still alive. Any plots used to kill Castro were not very effective.

Now if Cuba did come into play in the murder of JFK it was not in the manner you describe.

John Kennedy was the first president to be seriously confronted with a nuclear war. The peaceful settlement of the Cuban Missile crisis and the quid pro quo removal of missiles by the Soviet Union from Cuba and the United States from Turkey turned Kennedy steadfastly against nuclear proliferation. If there is a connection between Cuba and the murder of JFK that is the connection.

In 1963 the Soviet Union did not consider Israel a friend. Nuclear weapons in Israel were no different than nuclear weapons in Turkey at that time. Kennedy would not allow it. Kennedy would not allow the nuclearization of the middle east.

http://en.wikipedia...._missile_crisis

Edited by Mike Rago
Link to post
Share on other sites

Your article , in my opinion, is an example of how it is hard to separate the writers secondary opinions from the data presented.

most independent researchers eventually recognize that the Cuban angles are the key to understanding the crime.

Now what does that mean? That adds no truth to the matter, if it is indeed correct.

BK: Most independent researchers eventually recognize that the Cuban angles are the key to understanding the crime.

If that statement is correct all it means is that most people are wrong.

BK: Wrong about what? Most people believe that something more than Oswald led to the assassination and most - more than 50% of those who study the assassination in detail - immediately recognize the Cuban connections and their significance. I recognized it in 1970 when I was still a teenager reading the WC supporting documents at the University of Dayton library. Since you are not an independent researcher, otherwise you would recognize the significance of the Cuban connections, I suggest you talk to some - any independent researcher and they will run down the Cuban connections for you, if you don't want to do your own research.

I would like to point out to you that Castro is still alive. Any plots used to kill Castro were not very effective.

Now if Cuba did come into play in the murder of JFK it was not in the manner you describe.

BK: I've just identified a previously unknown plot to kill Castro, and just beginning to describe it, and will continue to do so even if you don't want to follow me in this manner.

John Kennedy was the first president to be seriously confronted with a nuclear war. The peaceful settlement of the Cuban Missile crisis and the quid pro quo removal of missiles by the Soviet Union from Cuba and the United States from Turkey turned Kennedy steadfastly against nuclear proliferation. If there is a connection between Cuba and the murder of JFK that is the connection.

BK: Then please put your theory in another post and write it up so we can all read it.

In 1963 the Soviet Union did not consider Israel a friend. Nuclear weapons in Israel were no different than nuclear weapons in Turkey at that time. Kennedy would not allow it. Kennedy would not allow the nuclearization of the middle east.

BK:: Well then you go off on this Isralie/Nuke tangent, see ya, but I'll stick to my theory - that JFK's death is related to his Cuban policies, that the assassination is related directly to the plots to kill Castro and that the specific plot utilzed at Dealey Plaza was the Valkyrie Plot discussed at the September 25, Joint Chiefs of Staff briefing, which is certainly getting a lot closer to the truth than we've been before.

http://en.wikipedia...._missile_crisis

I appreciate it when anyone takes the time to read my stuff and will read and try to respond to every comment directed at me and my work and use the work of others to support my contentions.

For those who doubt that most independent researchers have reached the conclusion that JFK's murder is connected to Cuba, then you haven't read them.

G. Robert Blakey: "I no longer believe that we were able to conduct an appropriate investigation of the [Central Intelligence] Agency and its relationship to Oswald.... I do not believe any denial offered by the Agency on any point. The law has long followed the rule that if a person lies to you on one point, you may reject all of his testimony.... We now know that the Agency withheld from the Warren Commission the CIA-Mafia plots to kill Castro. Had the commission known of the plots, it would have followed a different path in its investigation.... We also now know that the Agency set up a process that could only have been designed to frustrate the ability of the committee in 1976-79 to obtain any information that might adversely affect the Agency. Many have told me that the culture of the Agency is one of prevarication and dissimulation and that you cannot trust it or its people. Period. End of story. I am now in that camp." --Robert Blakey, staff director and chief counsel for the U.S. House Select Committee on Assassinations, statement from 2003

And since Rago was rude enough to step on my post almost immediately after it was posted he couldn't have read it, and didn't bother to include the link, here it is again.

JFKcountercoup: Valkyrie At Dealey Plaza - Updated

Bill Kelly

JFKCountercoup2

Edited by William Kelly
Link to post
Share on other sites

Your article , in my opinion, is an example of how it is hard to separate the writers secondary opinions from the data presented.

most independent researchers eventually recognize that the Cuban angles are the key to understanding the crime.

Now what does that mean? That adds no truth to the matter, if it is indeed correct.

BK: Most independent researchers eventually recognize that the Cuban angles are the key to understanding the crime.

If that statement is correct all it means is that most people are wrong.

BK: Wrong about what? Most people believe that something more than Oswald led to the assassination and most - more than 50% of those who study the assassination in detail - immediately recognize the Cuban connections and their significance. I recognized it in 1970 when I was still a teenager reading the WC supporting documents at the University of Dayton library. Since you are not an independent researcher, otherwise you would recognize the significance of the Cuban connections, I suggest you talk to some - any independent researcher and they will run down the Cuban connections for you, if you don't want to do your own research.

I would like to point out to you that Castro is still alive. Any plots used to kill Castro were not very effective.

Now if Cuba did come into play in the murder of JFK it was not in the manner you describe.

BK: I've just identified a previously unknown plot to kill Castro, and just beginning to describe it, and will continue to do so even if you don't want to follow me in this manner.

John Kennedy was the first president to be seriously confronted with a nuclear war. The peaceful settlement of the Cuban Missile crisis and the quid pro quo removal of missiles by the Soviet Union from Cuba and the United States from Turkey turned Kennedy steadfastly against nuclear proliferation. If there is a connection between Cuba and the murder of JFK that is the connection.

BK: Then please put your theory in another post and write it up so we can all read it.

In 1963 the Soviet Union did not consider Israel a friend. Nuclear weapons in Israel were no different than nuclear weapons in Turkey at that time. Kennedy would not allow it. Kennedy would not allow the nuclearization of the middle east.

BK:: Well then you go off on this Isralie/Nuke tangent, see ya, but I'll stick to my theory - that JFK's death is related to his Cuban policies, that the assassination is related directly to the plots to kill Castro and that the specific plot utilzed at Dealey Plaza was the Valkyrie Plot discussed at the September 25, Joint Chiefs of Staff briefing, which is certainly getting a lot closer to the truth than we've been before.

http://en.wikipedia...._missile_crisis

I appreciate it when anyone takes the time to read my stuff and will read and try to respond to every comment directed at me and my work and use the work of others to support my contentions.

For those who doubt that most independent researchers have reached the conclusion that JFK's murder is connected to Cuba, then you haven't read them.

G. Robert Blakey: "I no longer believe that we were able to conduct an appropriate investigation of the [Central Intelligence] Agency and its relationship to Oswald.... I do not believe any denial offered by the Agency on any point. The law has long followed the rule that if a person lies to you on one point, you may reject all of his testimony.... We now know that the Agency withheld from the Warren Commission the CIA-Mafia plots to kill Castro. Had the commission known of the plots, it would have followed a different path in its investigation.... We also now know that the Agency set up a process that could only have been designed to frustrate the ability of the committee in 1976-79 to obtain any information that might adversely affect the Agency. Many have told me that the culture of the Agency is one of prevarication and dissimulation and that you cannot trust it or its people. Period. End of story. I am now in that camp." --Robert Blakey, staff director and chief counsel for the U.S. House Select Committee on Assassinations, statement from 2003

And since Rago was rude enough to step on my post almost immediately after it was posted he couldn't have read it, and didn't bother to include the link, here it is again.

JFKcountercoup: Valkyrie At Dealey Plaza - Updated

Bill Kelly

JFKCountercoup2

"I read enough of your article." - Mike Rago

Well then we don't expect you to step on my posts anymore then do we?

BK

Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you call stepping on a post? It is not intentional if that is what you mean. I just react to what I read.

I have to admit that your "Hidden Museum" idea has riled me up.

I am going to hold you to a a very high standard so I can be sure there will not be any "hidden hidden history", meaning

you have to show that you and your cohorts will be trustworthy gatekeepers of the "Hidden History" museum.

Edited by Mike Rago
Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you call stepping on a post? It is not intentional if that is what you mean. I just react to what I read.

I have to admit that your "Hidden Museum" idea has riled me up.

I am going to hold you to a a very high standard so I can be sure there will not be any "hidden hidden history", meaning

you have to show that you and your cohorts will be trustworthy gatekeepers of the "Hidden History" museum.

Okay, I realized you really don't know when you questioned the Cuban angles.

The Hidden History museum isn't my idea and I never said it was.

I too hold my cohorts to a high state of trustworthy ness - and they aren't gatekeepers, they are gatecrashers.

I hold you to no standards because you have showed you have none.

By Stepping on a post, I mean that when I post a link to my article and ask people to read it and respond - and you immediately post something after it - without including my comments and the LINK - then you stepped on it so people will only read your response, and not see my comments and my link - that we are talking about, or supposed to be talking about as it is the title of this thread:

Now you asked what is a good researcher and I've told you.

You say you don't see the Cuban connections and I tell you

You claim not to know what stepping on a post is and I explain it.

You should get school credit for being here - all the learning your doin'

JFKcountercoup: Valkyrie At Dealey Plaza - Updated

BK

JFKCountercoup2

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I certainly was not trying t hide the link to your website by responding. That thought never ever occurred to me.

Look at the bright side you have had the chance to post the link to your website 4 times!

Edited by Mike Rago
Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you call stepping on a post? It is not intentional if that is what you mean. I just react to what I read.

I have to admit that your "Hidden Museum" idea has riled me up.

I am going to hold you to a a very high standard so I can be sure there will not be any "hidden hidden history", meaning

you have to show that you and your cohorts will be trustworthy gatekeepers of the "Hidden History" museum.

Okay, I realized you really don't know when you questioned the Cuban angles.

The Hidden History museum isn't my idea and I never said it was.

I too hold my cohorts to a high state of trustworthy ness - and they aren't gatekeepers, they are gatecrashers.

I hold you to no standards because you have showed you have none.

By Stepping on a post, I mean that when I post a link to my article and ask people to read it and respond - and you immediately post something after it - without including my comments and the LINK - then you stepped on it so people will only read your response, and not see my comments and my link - that we are talking about, or supposed to be talking about as it is the title of this thread:

Now you asked what is a good researcher and I've told you.

You say you don't see the Cuban connections and I tell you

You claim not to know what stepping on a post is and I explain it.

You should get school credit for being here - all the learning your doin'

JFKcountercoup: Valkyrie At Dealey Plaza - Updated

BK

JFKCountercoup2

While I have never complained about anyone on this forum before, and was personally recruited to join this forum by John Simkin, if Mike Rago responds to this thread again, I will file a complaint.

I also officially question why this forum, that at one time had the top ten researchers on the JFK case exchanging information at the same time, now allows people with no knowledge of this case or internet policy to post at will, repeatedly stepping on my posts after being politely requested not to do so, and say nothing at all.

And Scully wonders I don't post much any more.

The level of research has declined tremendously, very little new information is presented, and non-researchers are permitted to use the forum as a platform for their egos.

I would like to hear from anyone who takes the time to read my revised article Valkyrie at Dealey Plaza, and would like to discuss it, as I think it might be significant if it is confirmed.

BK

Edited by William Kelly
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read most of your article. I have several questions ....

You say there are many Cuban connections to the murder. I would like for you to define what you mean? Who was present at the scene of the crime that you claim are Cuban connections to the murder? This is a serious question. If they are not present at the scene of the crime then I think you need to define what you mean by "connections" when you use that term.

Your entire article rests on the above statement as its foundation. Lets examine how solid that foundation is.

Those who take up a study the assassination of President Kennedy quickly notice that there are many Cuban connections to the murder and most independent researchers eventually recognize that the Cuban angles are the key to understanding the crime.

New information, like beauty and just about everything else in life is in the eye of the beholder.

The level of research has declined tremendously, very little new information is presented, and non-researchers are permitted to use the forum as a platform for their egos.

I suppose what we are supposed to take from your article is that John Kennedy was the bad guy, like Hitler and deserved to be murdered. How do you say it, the 4 people who failed in their attempt to murder Hitler were successful in their attempt to murder Kennedy. I will be polite and not state what I really think about this article.

countercoupbs.png

http://www.truthmove.org/forum/topic/1344

Edited by Mike Rago
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read most of your article. I have several questions ....

You say there are many Cuban connections to the murder. I would like for you to define what you mean? Who was present at the scene of the crime that you claim are Cuban connections to the murder? This is a serious question. If they are not present at the scene of the crime then I think you need to define what you mean by "connections" when you use that term.

Your entire article rests on the above statement as its foundation. Lets examine how solid that foundation is.

Those who take up a study the assassination of President Kennedy quickly notice that there are many Cuban connections to the murder and most independent researchers eventually recognize that the Cuban angles are the key to understanding the crime.

New information, like beauty and just about everything else in life is in the eye of the beholder.

The level of research has declined tremendously, very little new information is presented, and non-researchers are permitted to use the forum as a platform for their egos.

I suppose what we are supposed to take from your article is that John Kennedy was the bad guy, like Hitler and deserved to be murdered. How do you say it, the 4 people who failed in their attempt to murder Hitler were successful in their attempt to murder Kennedy. I will be polite and not state what really think about this article.

Okay Mike, I'll play your game.

For starters, as I have posted in the past, the Homicide detective handbook says that who are murdered when the motive is elimination, as the assassination of JFK most likely was, the investigation should not focus on the accused trigger-men, as they are hired killers, but the victim himself holds the key to the crime.

If Oswald was the assassin or Patsy, then his background in the FPCC, his attempts to get visa to Cuba in Mexico City, his admiration for Castro and use of the Hidel alias are among the items that call attention to the Cuban connections.

As he was murdered by Jack Ruby, Ruby had visited Cuba on more than one occasion, and both Oswald and Ruby visited Castro's friend Robert McKowan, regarding Cuba.

If the Tippit murder is connected to the JFK assassination, as many believe, then Tippit's association with his good friend Carl Mather is a direct connection between the assassination and JMWAVE, the CIA station where officially approved missions were planned and operated from.

Nor do I say that JFK was a bad guy who deserved to be murdered, though I'm sure those who killed him thought that way.

And you can be really polite and not respond anymore.

And I would please request from Tom Scully and/or any other moderator to please prevent Mike Rago from stepping on my posts any more, as he has done it five times now.

Rago is no longer the innocent poster he pretends to be but is intentionally interfering with this thread and intimidating and preventing others from responding.

JFKcountercoup: Valkyrie At Dealey Plaza - Updated

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read most of your article. I have several questions ....

You say there are many Cuban connections to the murder. I would like for you to define what you mean? Who was present at the scene of the crime that you claim are Cuban connections to the murder? This is a serious question. If they are not present at the scene of the crime then I think you need to define what you mean by "connections" when you use that term.

Your entire article rests on the above statement as its foundation. Lets examine how solid that foundation is.

Those who take up a study the assassination of President Kennedy quickly notice that there are many Cuban connections to the murder and most independent researchers eventually recognize that the Cuban angles are the key to understanding the crime.

New information, like beauty and just about everything else in life is in the eye of the beholder.

The level of research has declined tremendously, very little new information is presented, and non-researchers are permitted to use the forum as a platform for their egos.

I suppose what we are supposed to take from your article is that John Kennedy was the bad guy, like Hitler and deserved to be murdered. How do you say it, the 4 people who failed in their attempt to murder Hitler were successful in their attempt to murder Kennedy. I will be polite and not state what really think about this article.

Okay Mike, I'll play your game.

For starters, as I have posted in the past, the Homicide detective handbook says that who are murdered when the motive is elimination, as the assassination of JFK most likely was, the investigation should not focus on the accused trigger-men, as they are hired killers, but the victim himself holds the key to the crime.

If Oswald was the assassin or Patsy, then his background in the FPCC, his attempts to get visa to Cuba in Mexico City, his admiration for Castro and use of the Hidel alias are among the items that call attention to the Cuban connections.

As he was murdered by Jack Ruby, Ruby had visited Cuba on more than one occasion, and both Oswald and Ruby visited Castro's friend Robert McKowan, regarding Cuba.

If the Tippit murder is connected to the JFK assassination, as many believe, then Tippit's association with his good friend Carl Mather is a direct connection between the assassination and JMWAVE, the CIA station where officially approved missions were planned and operated from.

Nor do I say that JFK was a bad guy who deserved to be murdered, though I'm sure those who killed him thought that way.

And you can be really polite and not respond anymore.

And I would please request from Tom Scully and/or any other moderator to please prevent Mike Rago from stepping on my posts any more, as he has done it five times now.

Rago is no longer the innocent poster he pretends to be but is intentionally interfering with this thread and intimidating and preventing others from responding.

JFKcountercoup: Valkyrie At Dealey Plaza - Updated

I am not stepping on your threads I am questioning your article.

I am one of the few people that read your article.

I have lots more questions and valid comments about this article.

So these are your many Cuban connections....

If Oswald was the assassin or Patsy, then his background in the FPCC, his attempts to get visa to Cuba in Mexico City, his admiration for Castro and use of the Hidel alias are among the items that call attention to the Cuban connections.

As he was murdered by Jack Ruby, Ruby had visited Cuba on more than one occasion, and both Oswald and Ruby visited Castro's friend Robert McKowan, regarding Cuba.

How does the Hidel alias call attention to a Cuban connection?

Oswald also defected to the Soviet Union and had a very Russian wife. What about that connection? If Oswald was the Patsy, which he was, they wanted you to examine his life and follow his rabbit holes! You do not disappoint them!

Jack Ruby also has more than one connection and Cuba is certainly not the most important one.

And your article does draw a parallel between Kennedy and Hitler. You say that 4 of the plotters were the same and the only difference was that the plot to kill Hitler failed but the plot to kill Kennedy succeeded.

Edited by Mike Rago
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...