Jump to content
The Education Forum

Did the Plotters Get What They Wanted?


Recommended Posts

We'd know for sure if we knew for sure why JFK was killed.

The answer's clearly no if the plotters wanted Castro overthrown and Cuba "liberated".

The answer's clearly yes if the plotters wanted a vastly expanded American commitment in South Viet Nam.

The answer is also clearly yes if the plotters, for whatever reason(s), simply wanted JFK dead. I subscribe to this view, but only this view.

The three views presented here divide the anti-Warren Commission group into three bitterly divided camps.

Pretty clearly, the plotters didn't care what LBJ was going to do as president. No one in power, except some senators, opposed LBJ's domestic or foreign policy. LBJ might have felt the sting of anti-war protests; but those were not barbs launched by the power elite.

The mafia and anti-Castro exiles, together with their CIA bedmates, were invisible by the fall of 1965. In early November 1965, the First Air Cav tangled with NVA regulars in the Ia Drang Valley. That battle made Cuba distant and forgotten history for TV-tuned Americans.

So who won from the killing of JFK?

IMO, it wasn't the army, and it certainly wasn't the CIA.

Sure, many Americans rejoiced at JFK's death. I observed some of them.

IMO, those who won from JFK's killing continue to profit from his death today.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The answer's clearly no if the plotters wanted Castro overthrown and Cuba "liberated".

The answer's clearly yes if the plotters wanted a vastly expanded American commitment in South Viet Nam.

The answer is also clearly yes if the plotters, for whatever reason(s), simply wanted JFK dead. I subscribe to this view, but only this view.

The three views presented here divide the anti-Warren Commission group into three bitterly divided camps.

That's a false trichotomy, if that's a word. I think that those who wanted Castro overthrown also wanted an expanded commitment in Vietnam. They didn't get Castro but they got the expanded commitment. So the answer is yes and no with regard to the plotters getting what they wanted. This view does not involve "bitterly divided camps."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron,

From what I know and also from what I observed in Viet Nam, the CIA's top officers were oriented toward the USSR and Cuba, while for the CIA Viet Nam was pretty much a young person's game. The CIA had a large, broad operation in Viet Nam.

The mafia bigwigs, from what I've read, were interested in Cuba, not Viet Nam. The drug profits from Viet Nam went mainly to the CIA, not to the mafia.

The Army was very much oriented toward Viet Nam. Certainly the Air Force, Navy, and Marines played large roles in Viet Nam.

Insiders like Bundy and Harriman were on top of both Cuba and Viet Nam, but by the fall of 1963, their focus had shifted toward Viet Nam.

The anti-Castro Cubans pretty clearly had no interest in Viet Nam.

Middle Eastern countries affected by JFK's policies and death had no stake in either Cuba or Viet Nam.

That's how I see the players oriented in the fall of 1963. I don't see much overlap between the interest groups.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron,

From what I know and also from what I observed in Viet Nam, the CIA's top officers were oriented toward the USSR and Cuba, while for the CIA Viet Nam was pretty much a young person's game. The CIA had a large, broad operation in Viet Nam.

Former OSS agent Gary Underhill, one of the suspicious deaths related to the assassination, allegedly told friends shortly before his "suicide" that the assassination was ordered by "a Far Eastern group in the CIA."

FWIW I think such a group might have included Lansdale, who was involved in both Vietnam and the plots against Castro.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Underhill also said "This country is too dangerous for me. I've got to get on a boat. Oswald is a patsy. They set him up. It's too much. The bastards have done something outrageous. They've killed the president! I've been listening and hearing things. I couldn't believe they'd get away with it, but they did. They've gone made! They're a bunch of drug runners and gun runners - a real violence group.I know who they are. That's the problem. They know I know. That's why I'm here.''

interestingly, several of the cia guys implicated or associated with jfk's murder were sent to vietnam, shackley and morales among them.

​also i can't believe that the kuomintang and corsican mob didn't take hefty cuts along with s. vietnamese officials

Edited by Martin Blank
Link to post
Share on other sites

Martin - the continuity from JFK to Iran-Contra is striking. A few of the Cuban operatives and CIA handlers died along the way, but some survived and thrived. For me the most striking thing is the George Bush connection. This even extends to Junior appointing Porter Goss to head the CIA. Shackley doesn't get nearly enough scrutiny. He and others, I think William Harvey, got their training in Germany when Gehlen became head of their CIA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter Dale Scott made a big deal of drug-running in "Deep Politics", a terrific book IMO.

Did drug-running have something to do with JFK's murder? I don't know. I do know first-hand that drugs poured into South Viet Nam. The drugs came from the "Golden Triangle", or whatever. A lot of American G.I.s got hooked on pure heroin. A lot of money was made in South Viet Nam and the U.S. from those drugs. Drugs played a big role, a huge role, in America's effort in Viet Nam.

There have been books written that assert the Bushes got into the drug game.

There even has been at least one book asserting JFK dabbled with LSD.

Drugs were an important commercial item throughout the 1960s.

I believe it's possible, just possible, JFK was killed so that the drug trade could flourish in S.E. Asia. Possible.

Edited by Jon G. Tidd
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...