Jump to content
The Education Forum

Stephen Kinzer on Frank Olson


David Andrews
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

On ‎9‎/‎25‎/‎2019 at 11:08 AM, James DiEugenio said:

Just be warned Ron, Kinzer is an MSM guy so he has to toe the line on anything related to the Kennedys.

This was clear in his book on the Dulles brothers.

Thanks.  After 182 pages of very interesting new information to me, there it is.  He uses Sam Halpern as a source to insist JFK & RFK were behind the continued efforts of the CIA and Eisenhower, which he illustrates well, to eliminate Castro.

I googled Kizner, read the amazon bio.  Then read your K& K link.  It all confuses me.

 https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/review-of-stephen-kinzer-poisoner-in-chief-sidney-gottlieb-and-the-cia-search-for-mind-control

Maybe the original intention?

He collates so much devastating information on Gottlieb and MLULTRA then dumps on JFK.  His experience in foreign NYT posts is impressive, as well as his  other books.  Given his position and experience,  how can he not know Halpern  spent the latter part of his life discrediting the Kennedys in general at the behest of Richard Helms?

A red herring. limited hangout?     

Edited by Ron Bulman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone who uses Halpern should have his head examined.

The guys who did the CIA Inspector General Report on the CIA Mafia plots decided he was a confabulator and so did not include him in the final report.  Even though Halpern was Helms' guy and they both reported to Helms.  The report, which said that neither Ike nor JFK was informed of the plots, and when RFK was briefed the CIA lied to him, was a disappointment to Helms.  So he filed it away in a safe and allowed no copies. Knowing the truth, he then sent out Halpern to lie his head off about it. Nagell didn't call him Dirty Dick for nothing.

BTW, anyone could see that the Kennedys were in the dark about this by using common sense.  Why would RFK need to be briefed on the plots in the first place?  Duh?  Maybe because he didn't know about them?  The CIA briefers reported that during their talk with RFK, the longer they went on the harder he was grinding his teeth. Bobby Kennedy then called in Helms, a meeting that DIrty DIck could not recall, and reamed him.

I heard Kinzer spreading this disinfo at a conference I went to in Virginia a few years ago.  When i got up to do my speech I had to correct the record. 

But alas, that is what the NY Times does to people.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

. . . Bobby Kennedy then called in Helms, a meeting that DIrty DIck could not recall, and reamed him.

Richard Helms USN Reserve 1942 - ?

1945, assigned to the Berlin office of SSU (Strategic Services Unit) which was then a key element of the War Department. In short order it became a large component of the Central Intelligence Group, remaining under control of the Military, and, directly managed by two Joint Chiefs. Helms was assigned to head the European Branch of this group whose whole inventory - including all the cmdrs and personnel - went in 1947 to the newly formed CIA.

Appointed DDCI by Johnson in '66, while Admiral Raborn headed up the agency. 'Admiral Raborn'. That sounds - as does Helms and, now,  the putatively civilian Central Intelligence Agency - suspiciously Military.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do have to say Kinzer does make it clear the assassination and other attempts (spraying LSD into a radio studio where Castro was to speak, powder in his boots to make his beard fall off) on Castro originated with Eisenhower as I believe others in the past have alleged the whole thing started with the Kennedys.  Actually he describes this in greater detail than I've read before.  From page 180.

"On May 13, 1960, after hearing a briefing from Allen Dulles, President Eisenhower ordered Castro "sawed off".  He did not use what CIA security director Sheffield Edwards later called "bad words", but everyone present understood this as a presidential directive to remove Castro from power by any means including assassination".  Dulles directed Bissell who contacted Robert Maheu as an intermediary to the mob.  Roselli related they would prefer not a traditional gangland style or sniper killing as there as too much chance of capture.  Supposedly Sam Giancana suggested a poison that took long enough to take effect for a getaway for the assassin.  Bissell had already instructed Gottlieb to find ways to discredit Castro (the LSD and beard falling off) which were dismissed as impractical.  Now Gottlieb came up with an exploding sea shell, toxic scuba suit, poisoned cigars, shell fish toxin in his food.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ron Bulman said:

I do have to say Kinzer does make it clear the assassination and other attempts (spraying LSD into a radio studio where Castro was to speak, powder in his boots to make his beard fall off) on Castro originated with Eisenhower as I believe others in the past have alleged the whole thing started with the Kennedys.  Actually he describes this in greater detail than I've read before.  From page 180.

"On May 13, 1960, after hearing a briefing from Allen Dulles, President Eisenhower ordered Castro "sawed off".  He did not use what CIA security director Sheffield Edwards later called "bad words", but everyone present understood this as a presidential directive to remove Castro from power by any means including assassination".  Dulles directed Bissell who contacted Robert Maheu as an intermediary to the mob.  Roselli related they would prefer not a traditional gangland style or sniper killing as there as too much chance of capture.  Supposedly Sam Giancana suggested a poison that took long enough to take effect for a getaway for the assassin.  Bissell had already instructed Gottlieb to find ways to discredit Castro (the LSD and beard falling off) which were dismissed as impractical.  Now Gottlieb came up with an exploding sea shell, toxic scuba suit, poisoned cigars, shell fish toxin in his food.  

Addendum.  "Choosing poison was not Gottlieb's only contribution to the Castro assassination project.  … "a ball point pen which had a hypodermic needle inside, that when you pushed the lever, the needle came out and poison could be injected into someone.  … the needle was designed to be so fine the target (Castro) would not sense it's insertion and the agent would have time to escape".  As Kinzer explains this weapon was being delivered in Paris on 11/22/63.  But he doesn't say by who or who to.  I've read about this last part before including those names but can't remember them myself at the moment.  At least one was a journalist if I remember right.  Any help, anyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another subject Kinzer delves into I've read about but not to this extent is George Hunter White.  Working for the Federal Bureau of Narcotics in WWII, loaned to the OSS.  1952, hosted Christmas party for James Angleton.  Next night they got together for drinks and did LSD.  Went to a Chinese restaurant, ordered, then got to laughing so hard they never ate and left.  Per Whites diary.

Still at the FBN in 1954 Gottlieb sub contracted him to set up and run a LSD test lab in an apartment in NYC with an adjoining apartment  for observation.  To bring unsuspecting subjects to for testing.  He busted by day and roamed the streets of Greenwich Village at night looking for the subjects.  Transferred by the FBN to San Francisco Gottlieb had him set up a government whorehouse he called a pad in what he named Operation Midnight Climax.  Gottlieb considered it such a success they opened another one in Mill Valley in Marin County.

By 1962 they had concluded LSD had no usefulness in interrogations.

Why was Jolly West still researching it with a separate "pad", and office at the San Francisco Haight Asbury Free Medical Clinic five years later.  When Manson hangs out there with his entourage.  While still obviously in Gottlieb's employ? (documented in Chaos). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ROn:

This is an ambiguous sentence:  "On May 13, 1960, after hearing a briefing from Allen Dulles, President Eisenhower ordered Castro "sawed off".  He did not use what CIA security director Sheffield Edwards later called "bad words", but everyone present understood this as a presidential directive to remove Castro from power by any means including assassination".

 

It could easily mean that the CIA decided this is what Eisenhower meant.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Continued running of the CIA 'done it' narratives most always ignore the Military's involvement at any random stop along the JFKA highway - most involvements occuring before CIA involvement. One of those narratives concerns the toxic warfare studies that are ascribed solely to Central Intelligence; the fact is they were actually conducted from their U.S.-funded inception by the Military and continued - if the Military is to believed - until 1975.

The two individuals mentioned most often in these narratives on the subject of post-ww2 chemical warfare - L. Wilson Green and Sidney Gottlieb - worked at Military facilities, ran testing at Military facilities, sent instructions to CIA from Military facilities, drew pay from Military facilities, reported to and under the command of a Military officer. That one of them proposed in a paper to his superiors that "American Military scientists be given a mission" in this arena of study - predating similar CIA proposals by five years - tells us one thing, and, answers The Kennedys and King website review's own query ' where else but in the CIA'.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/8/2019 at 11:07 PM, Ron Bulman said:

W., your having West approve you as "in" at UCLA is fascinating.  You really need to read at least Chapter 11 of Tom O'Neill's Chaos.  I don't want to get this thread moved like the one on the book was but he relates to Ruby - JFK.

The author was looking for info on West in relation to Manson and discovered his previously ignored files, 200 boxes, in the basement of the UCLA library.  He spent two months digging.  "And then Jolly West happened."

Which led him where he didn't want to go, the JFK assassination via Jack Ruby.  

West tried to interject himself immediately (while at OU) but was rebuffed by Judge Joe Brown.  When Ruby was convicted he fired his former lawyers for the appeal.  But retained one of them, Attorney and Dr. Hubert Smith.  Who immediately brought in Dr. Jolly West.  "Nearly a half dozen psychiatrists had found him (Ruby) compos mentis."  At this point.

"West emerged from Ruby's cell (alone with him) to announce the previously sane inmate had undergone "an acute psychotic beak" sometime in the preceding forty eight hours ."

'From that day forward, every doctor who examined Ruby made similar diagnoses: he was delusional."

Peculiar ain't it?  The chapter goes much deeper on Jolly.

Given your profession and a personal connection the chapter is worth the price and your time.  Chapter 10 set's the stage for how he discovered it though. 

Ron,

This scene from the Batman movie "Dark Knight Rises" is so close to what you just described that I have to link it.

Here's Cilliian Murphy as Joly West and Tom Wilkinson as Jack Ruby (Wilkinson even resembles Ruby, if you squint!):

 

Edited by Paul Jolliffe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When all the euphemisms, nicknames, and, other examples of avoidance speech, which are used to describe the rulers of the USA and much of the rest of the planet - the Deep State, the Shadow government, the One Percent (this is a pretty good label for the 3.5 million employees of one very persuasive Department of the government in a nation of 350 million citizens - but it was popularized during Operation: Wall Street, and, talk about a mis-direction), the Banksters, and, the future terms people will come up in their quest to run from the cold hard truth - are stripped away, we'll be left with just one word; Junta. Say it with me, now.

odierno-last-briefing-600-picsay.jpg

Edited by Jon Pickering
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

ROn:

This is an ambiguous sentence:  "On May 13, 1960, after hearing a briefing from Allen Dulles, President Eisenhower ordered Castro "sawed off".  He did not use what CIA security director Sheffield Edwards later called "bad words", but everyone present understood this as a presidential directive to remove Castro from power by any means including assassination".

 

It could easily mean that the CIA decided this is what Eisenhower meant.  

 

Yes, sawed off could be interpreted in more than one way.  To be honest I wondered if maybe Dulles was putting words into Ike's mouth in the first place.  What I was really getting at was this seems to support that the assassination attempts on Castro started before JFK.  I wouldn't put it past Dulles.  Some think he may have sabotaged Ike's peace talks with Khrushchev with the U2 Powers incident.  Kinzer addresses this from the perspective of Gottlieb developing the poison pin in a silver dollar Powers didn't use.  He details the Russians discovery of this and presentation at their trial of Powers. 

He also mentions on page 177 that Dulles claims in 1960 that Ike said Lumumba should be eliminated.  So Gottlieb developed a poison package.  Then delivered it in person as "Joe from Paris" to the CIA station chief in Leopoldville (they were previously acquainted).  He details why this didn't work out.

None of this excuses using Halpern as a source but it's interesting to me at least.  He does have pretty extensive notes I've not looked into yet.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Yes, sawed off could be interpreted in more than one way.  To be honest I wondered if maybe Dulles was putting words into Ike's mouth in the first place.  What I was really getting at was this seems to support that the assassination attempts on Castro started before JFK.  I wouldn't put it past Dulles.  Some think he may have sabotaged Ike's peace talks with Khrushchev with the U2 Powers incident.  Kinzer addresses this from the perspective of Gottlieb developing the poison pin in a silver dollar Powers didn't use.  He details the Russians discovery of this and presentation at their trial of Powers. 

He also mentions on page 177 that Dulles claims in 1960 that Ike said Lumumba should be eliminated.  So Gottlieb developed a poison package.  Then delivered it in person as "Joe from Paris" to the CIA station chief in Leopoldville (they were previously acquainted).  He details why this didn't work out.

None of this excuses using Halpern as a source but it's interesting to me at least.  He does have pretty extensive notes I've not looked into yet.  

Ron,

This article does a nice job of summarizing the circumstances surrounding the U 2 shoot-down. Whether the U 2 was sabotaged or not, the effect of the shoot-down was to perpetuate the status quo for the both the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. war machines. Both Eisenhower and Khrushchev saw their hopes for a reduction in their respective arms budgets dashed because of the U 2 incident. 

Personally, I'd bet serious money that Allen Dulles not only sabotaged that flight, but had arranged for the "elimination" of Francis Gary Powers in 1960, only to be foiled by Powers own sense of self-preservation. 

https://www.counterpunch.org/2009/11/27/mayday-1960/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Paul Jolliffe said:

Ron,

This article does a nice job of summarizing the circumstances surrounding the U 2 shoot-down. Whether the U 2 was sabotaged or not, the effect of the shoot-down was to perpetuate the status quo for the both the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. war machines. Both Eisenhower and Khrushchev saw their hopes for a reduction in their respective arms budgets dashed because of the U 2 incident. 

Personally, I'd bet serious money that Allen Dulles not only sabotaged that flight, but had arranged for the "elimination" of Francis Gary Powers in 1960, only to be foiled by Powers own sense of self-preservation. 

https://www.counterpunch.org/2009/11/27/mayday-1960/

Thanks Paul.  That's about the most comprehensive information I've read on the U2 possibilities.  The part about Ike's aide saying he (Ike) didn't trust Dulles is revealing in particular.  

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...