New Fred Litwin Article on Morley

[Greg Doudna]

Litwin’s docs are certainly convincing to me that jfk and rfk were intent on having Castro removed prior to the 1964 election (if Castro wasn’t willing to convert to being a US client). 

JFK in his visionary American University speech envisioned an end to the Cold War with the USSR, basic settlement of spheres of influence, respect for each other’s Monroe Doctrines, but as part of that settlement Cuba must be Castro-free in that vision (because regarded as in US sphere). Everything looks like JFK was intent on ousting Castro with intent that the USSR accept that and JFK did not wish war with the USSR. 

Litwins article brings to attention the documents showing that (re the Cuba angle of that).

Larry Schnapf, calling Litwin dishonest without saying specifically where in the present article is unacceptable rhetoric. 

[Lawrence Schnapf]

@Greg Doudna I posted to fred in a different thread how he mischaraterized what the surgeon said about the Connolly wound.  I pointed out to Fred that his account was wrong and misleading. i cant find what thread this occurred. it was not the first time found he had not accurately reported information or had overstated some evidence. In each instance, he declines to make a correction. I told him he was doing a misservice to his readers when not correcting his error. he ignored my comment and continued to keep the misleading or inaccurate statement. Do you call that the action of an honest person who is seeking the truth or simply someone trying to advance a narrative? I call people out on either side that share disinformation.         

[Kirk Gallaway]

18 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

The record has long been obvious, IMO, that JFK was both trying to overthrow Castro and trying to make nice with Castro. This is how it is done, people. You work both ends. If you make headway on the one end then you might stop working the other. But until that time... 

I agree with you in principle Pat. But that's quite a stretch, plotting for the overthrow and perhaps assassination of Castro while trying to make nice with him?

Some would find going to that extreme rather duplistic. But I do agree with you. I wouldn't put that beyond him. In fact, I think that's exactly what he did.

JFK has been made into a Catholic Saint here on the forum, with a high moral character.. I think JFK was a  very smart guy who was somewhat amoral, (not immoral!) person and a cold pragmatist. He was going to play whatever angle he could, and pursue the one that yielded results, either actual results or political results.  However he could see that his perceived triumph in the Cuban Missile Crisis afforded him an opportunity to go to the head cheese, and make further overtures with his AU speech to Khrushchev and the  Soviet Union to defuse the situation in Cuba.

With all the expected accolades to JFK from those in his cabinet. It always comes off so smoothed over, and they always portray JFK as this iconic figure, with very little real insight IMO. I don't think anybody, outside of his brother really knew him. And I haven't seen any evidence in tape conversations, despite being different people, that Bobby has ever discussed with JFK the motivations behind why he acts the way he does. Which doesn't mean it didn't happen. Just my take.

Greg brings up the possibility  that such a settlement would involve a mutual agreement to get rid of Castro. I'm not sure JFK considered that  politically essential because I don't think it was. JMO

Pat:As far as "re-sinking the Maine", that is not a reference to a Northwoods like operation, where innocents would be killed. It's a reference to taking advantage of a propaganda opportunity, should one arise. Kinda like LBJ did with the Gulf of Tonkin incident. 

But just his mentioning the Sinking of the Maine doesn't inspire my confidence.

Gulf of Tonkin?   Yikes!

[Allen Lowe]

If JFK had wanted to remove Castro he would have done it at the Bay of Pigs. It was all set up, there was a rationale (protect the Cubans); but it is all b.s. And by the way, Morley, on his substack, has already demolished Litwin's arguments.

[Michael Griffith]

On 7/6/2023 at 11:37 AM, Greg Doudna said:

Litwin’s docs are certainly convincing to me that JFK and RFK were intent on having Castro removed prior to the 1964 election (if Castro wasn’t willing to convert to being a US client). 

JFK in his visionary American University speech envisioned an end to the Cold War with the USSR, basic settlement of spheres of influence, respect for each other’s Monroe Doctrines, but as part of that settlement Cuba must be Castro-free in that vision (because regarded as in US sphere). Everything looks like JFK was intent on ousting Castro with intent that the USSR accept that and JFK did not wish war with the USSR. 

Litwin's article brings to attention the documents showing that (re the Cuba angle of that).

Larry Schnapf, calling Litwin dishonest without saying specifically where in the present article is unacceptable rhetoric. 

I agree with 99.99% of everything you say here, Greg. 

And we should remember that in JFK's American University speech, he made the following statements, which liberal summaries of the speech usual ignore:

The Communist drive to impose their political and economic system on others is the primary cause of world tension today. For there can be no doubt that, if all nations could refrain from interfering in the self-determination of others, the peace would be much more assured.

As Americans, we find communism profoundly repugnant as a negation of personal freedom and dignity.

It is discouraging to think that their leaders may actually believe what their propagandists write. It is discouraging to read a recent authoritative Soviet text on Military Strategy and find, on page after page, wholly baseless and incredible claims--such as the allegation that "American imperialist circles are preparing to unleash different types of wars . . . that there is a very real threat of a preventive war being unleashed by American imperialists against the Soviet Union . . . [and that] the political aims of the American imperialists are to enslave economically and politically the European and other capitalist countries . . . [and] to achieve world domination . . . by means of aggressive wars."