Jump to content
The Education Forum

What event/events precipitated the plot to kill JFK


Recommended Posts

LP: Case Closed presents a credible theory?

What, with the assassin firing into the railway yards in the appendix? 

Lance, you are a real piece of work.  Well Tracy finally joined you, he actually defended Posner's pile of hooey back in the day.

For the record, I agree with Larry.  And I also think that Oswald going to New Orleans in April was a definite part of the set up.  

I also think that the target date for the plot was for the fall of 1963.  And there were two, or maybe three, attempts to pull it off: the previous two were Chicago, and perhaps Tampa.  IMO, the evidence adduced about Chicago is  solid.  And when you compare it to the outline of what happened in Dallas, well, its very similar.  That is probably why the SS "lost"  all those November records back in 1994.  Just when the ARRB was going to collect them.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 44
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1 hour ago, Michael Clark said:

It's more of a symbolic than a specific culprit, although UFC has the convenience of tying the Dulles Brothers and John Cabot Lodge, who's fingerprints are often claimed to be detected on some of the evidence.

I've also come to think that Francis Ford Coppola is trying to tell us the same thing with the oranges that seem to appear in many scenes, especially in the one where Michael is sucking on a half-peeled orange when he is insisting that even the president can be hit if they decided to do it.

Traditionally, the New Orleans mob's main racket was in the fruit business, so that is a convenient place to see a culprit.

Again, and not just to be sensitive to Lance and his families deep ties to death, destruction, and desire for world domination :lol:, I note that the UFC angle is largely notional, but it has the Guatemala Coup as a handy reference point.

 

Mike

Interesting, I had not heard that interpretation of the oranges in the Godfather. You may be right.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Lance,

I think you just made a big mistake by admitting your family ties to United Fruit. That company is one of the long cherished "bogeymen" in the eyes of many theorists. You may have just gone from researcher to suspect. :)

If that were not bad enough, my grandmother traveled in very rarified social circles and was actually acquainted with the Dulles family (mostly John Foster, I believe)!  I have often thought how easy it is to make all sorts of "suspicious" connections if you work hard enough at it.  It's kind of like the JFK version of the notion that everyone in Hollywood is within six degrees of separation of Kevin Bacon.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

LP: Case Closed presents a credible theory?

What, with the assassin firing into the railway yards in the appendix? 

I have no idea what you are talking about here.  My copy of Case Closed has no shot being fired into the railway yard in the appendix.  Appendix A does have a graphic of the three shots but no suggestion a shot went into the railway yard.

A "credible theory" does not hinge on Posner (or even a conspiracy theorist) having an absolutely watertight, error-free presentation.  Let's say for the sake of argument that Posner has an absolutely goofy, demonstrably incorrect understanding of the shot sequence.  Unless someone can prove beyond any doubt (1) what the correct shot sequence was and (2) that LHO could not possibly have been the sole source of all the shots, then any error by Posner in this regard is irrelevant.

By "credible theory," I mean one based upon the best evidence as to who LHO actually was and what LHO actually did, all of which leads to an entirely plausible conclusion that he did what he is alleged to have done on the day of the assassination.  He had the motive, the opportunity and the means.  From all we know of his history and psychology, the assassination of JFK would have made sense to him.  Does every last piece of evidence fit neatly into place?  Of course not - it never does.

I am not saying Posner's explanation is the only possible one.  But it does make sense and holds together well.  To me, it is most consistent with who LHO actually was, from the day of his birth to the day of the assassination.  To suggest it isn't credible because the appendix supposedly includes some suggestion the assassin fired into the railway yard - which my copy doesn't anyway - surely says more about the "neener neener" level at which these Lone Nut vs. Conspiracy debates take place than it does about the quality of Posner's work.

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Lance Payette said:

If that were not bad enough, my grandmother traveled in very rarified social circles and was actually acquainted with the Dulles family (mostly John Foster, I believe)!  I have often thought how easy it is to make all sorts of "suspicious" connections if you work hard enough at it.  It's kind of like the JFK version of the notion that everyone in Hollywood is within six degrees of separation of Kevin Bacon.

I think you are doomed for sure now ! :) Seriously, I remember Gus Russo said something to the effect of he was suspicious of the CIA until he lived in the DC area and became acquainted with many CIA employees and decided they weren't that spooky after all. 

Edited by W. Tracy Parnell
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just thinking about presidential term limits, and I had to refresh myself regarding which amendment governed that. It is the twenty second amendment. And, as Is typical for me, whenever I am engaged in focused, extensive study, all things tend to swing into that orbit, whether they belong there or not, and I have to weed those items out.

So I read through the twenty second amendment and I went to weed it out of the JFK assassination orbit. I realized it may have a place, at least it may be toyed with to see if it has a place in this debate. I earlier, in this thread, stated that I saw the begininnings of the conspiracy start at the time of the Nixon-Kennedy debate.

Please remember that I am just toying with this.....

It occurred to me that, if that time frame for the beginning of the plot is correct, the 22nd amendment would have or could have some affect on when the assassination would be carried out. And, WHEN it was carried out would or could carry some indication as to who might have, or who would not have done it when t was done.

As it was, JFK had served more than two years when he was shot. Therefore, LBJ was entitled to run for president in the 64, and 68 election. This timing puts points onto LBJ's scorecard as a likely perp. This also takes points off the scorecard of a right-wing, Walker/Bircher or southern conservative perpetrators scorecard. As far as the MICC goes it's probably a wash if they felt that they could get the economic, budget and foreign policies that they wanted out of him. It's also possible that he was owned and could be manipulated and controled due to the fact that they had him buried so deeply under his own dirt that they could get what they wanted or get rid of him when they wanted.

It's not a well developed theory. It's just a set of some hasty observations, with a host of suppositions, that I thought I would share while reading about the 22nd amendment.

 

Cheers, Mike

Edited by Michael Clark
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Lance Payette said:

1. Case Closed presents an entirely believable scenario involving only LHO

2. My family was among the founding fathers of the United Fruit Company

Case Closed and Bugliosi's book tied as the least "believable" books ever written about the JFK assassination.

Case Closed and United Fruit's relationship to CIA is as well known as CIA's complicity in the assassination. If it wasn't already, your credibility is less than zero...

EDIT: Jim D. I responded before reading the entire thread. Your comments as expected are right on the mark.

Edited by Tom Neal
Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the Cuban Missile crisis was the beginning of the end.He only just restrained his Generals from starting WW111.And he was talking via the back door to Kruschev.

 

I imagined the likes of Curtis Le May in a room with other top brass saying something like that damn Kennedy needs shooting,he is a Commie.And someone saying.Yeah,lets do it.But I always had a vivid imagination.  :ph34r:

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Tom Neal said:

Case Closed and United Fruit's relationship to CIA is as well known as CIA's complicity in the assassination. If it wasn't already, your credibility is less than zero...

Ah, yes, Conspiracy Logic!  The fact that a remote relative of mine was involved in the formation of the United Fruit Company in 1899 indeed does cast a long shadow over my Internet postings in 2017, I understand that.  United Fruit Company ... John Foster Dulles ... CIA ... JFK assassination ... Internet poster in 2017.  Yep, the link is there, it cannot be denied.  Dang, you've figured me out.  I have slipped on my banana peel, figuratively speaking.  I am here as a United Fruit Company Operative (oh, yes, we have them, although these days we are known as Chiquita Brands Operatives) to promote the Lone Nut theory.  This will benefit the banana industry and the CIA by ... well, my masters have not yet explained exactly how, and I'm a bit fuzzy myself as to exactly what my mission is, but I am confident they know what they are doing.  This conspiracy is bigger than you can imagine (well, probably not, but it's huge).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lance P

Shot sequence = the evidence points to the following:

Shot 1: Hit Kennedy in the back

Shot 2: Hit Kennedy in the throat

Shot 3: Hit Connally in the back

Shot 4: Missed and ricochetted caused injury to Tague

Shot 5: Hit Kennedy in the head

Shot 6: Missed lodged in grass south side of Elm

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Here's a "strange but true" thing I found when I was researching Oswald in the summer before the Mexico City thing...
He looks for only Photo related work except for an entry at "United Fruit" in New Orleans.  

As to the seed of assassination?  The military and CIA were made to look very foolish in the eyes of the world in April 1961 when the time island of Cuba kicked the crap out of the US backed incursion.  Ike was asleep while Nixon's war machine began overthrowing countries.  1960 needed to be Nixon.  When he lost I believe those involved used the Bay of Pigs as the new president's first big test - a litmus on whether his rhetoric was politics or policy.   

JFK approved the D-Day strikes (subsequent to the previous strike) on April 16... and the story goes that he called it off the night before...   but;

At about 9:30 P.M. on 16 April, Mr. McGeorge Bundy, Special Assistant to the President, telephoned General C.P. Cabell of CIA to inform him that the dawn air strikes the following morning should not be launched until they could be conducted from a strip within the beachhead. Mr. Bundy indicated that any further consultation with regard to this matter should be with the Secretary of State (Memo. 1, para. 43).

G

eneral Cabell, accompanied by Mr. Bissell, went at once to Secretary Rusk's office, arriving there about 10:15 P.M. There they received a telephone call from [deleted reference to one of the brigade commanders] who, having learned of the cancellation of the D-Day strikes, called to present his view of the gravity of the decision. General Cabell and Mr. Bissell then tried to persuade the Secretary of State to permit the dawn D-Day strkes. The Secretary indicated that there were policy consideratons against air strikes before the beachhead airfield was in the hands of the landing force and completely operational, capable of supporting the raids. The two CIA representatives pointed out the risk of loss to the shipping if the Castro Air Force were not neutralized by the dawn strkes. They also stressed the difficulty which the B-26 airplanes would have in isolating the battlefield after the landing, as well as the heavier scale of air attack to which the disembarked forces would be exposed. The Secretary of State indicated subsequently that their presentation led him to feel that while the air strikes were indeed important, they were not vital.

However, he offered them the privilege of telephoning the President in order to present their views to him. They saw no point in speaking personally to the President and so informed the Secretary of State. The order cancelling the D-Day strkes was dispatched to the departure field in Nicaragua, arriving when the pilots were in their cockpits ready for take-off. The Joint Chiefs of Staff learned of the cancellation at varying hours the following morning (Memo. 1, para. 44).

 

Question: Did you attempt to advise the President as to the importance of the air strikes?

Rusk: I had talked to him and he had stated that if there weren't overriding considerations the second strikes shouldn't be made. Since Mr. Bissell and General Cabell didn't want to talk to the President on the matter, I felt there were no overriding considerations to advise him of. I didn't think they believed the dawn air strikes were too important. I believe that Castro turned out to have more operational air strength than we figured.

 

It appears to me that Bundy, Cabell, Bissell and Rusk are in on something that will push JFK into a corner since virtually all the discussion to this point in the records shows an agreement on this D-Day air support.  The CIA putting the blame all on JFK in the eyes of the Joint Chiefs and JFK focusing on the CIA rather than the military shows me the military was always pulling the CIA strings.

Dulles went to far as to actually say he believe the young president would break and send air support.  since it was never JFK who removed the support, I believe this was the initial seed of JFK's assassination.

   

 

Edited by David Josephs
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh no,  c'mon.

It was made clear to everyone that the D-Day air strikes were not to be launched unless a strip could be secured from on the island.  This is in the Taylor Review Board, and McNamara, before he died, said this to Noel Twyman.  He said that the CIA came back to them during the operation and asked us to add on those strikes.

The proof of this is in the revised plan.  After JFK vetoed the first plan, and the first location, the CIA drew up a second plan for a new location, the Bay of Pigs.  In that plan they explicitly state this area as having good geography for an air strip since they will need to launch any more strikes from inside Cuba. They acknowledge this no less than three times!  (Destiny Betrayed, Second Edition, p. 45)  

Hawkins, the guy who planned the whole thing, said he understood this to be the case once the plan was revised, and he got that from Bissell. (p. 46)

So everyone understood this.  That is what Bundy's call was about.  That is why Bissell and Cabell went to ask Rusk about it.  Because as both men knew, this was a break with the new plan.  Even Hunt admits that Cabell knew this.  (Give us this Day,p. 196)  That is why he and Bissell went to see Rusk, and Rusk then asked them if they wanted to talk to the president. They declined since they knew what the answer would be.

And BTW, Rusk said that because he had been advised the day before by JFK himself that any D Day strikes would have to come from a strip on the island. (DiEugenio, p. 46)

The reason that spot had been picked in the revised plan was for that exact reason, it offered one, and perhaps two, natural air strips.

I mean, my God, how much evidence do you need to kill this myth once and for all. 

And if I may add, what does this have to do with the subject?  They were planning on killing JFK from the spring of 1961?

 

 

 

 

Edited by James DiEugenio
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...