If the CIA was involved at all, in any way...

[Ashton Gray]

STAN: I don't believe now that it really had anything to do with Cuba.

ASHTON: Of course it didn't. Never had diddly to do with Cuba. Nor was the Bay of Pigs "invasion" for any of the reasons the CIA ever trotted out. Nor was there ever any CIA program to assassinate Castro. All long-after-the-fact dog-and-pony-show patented CIA limited hangout BS to cover what they really had been doing. If anybody thinks one syllable in this paragraph is sarcastic or facetious in the slightest, better pause and think again. Real hard.

...I love it when people pooh-pooh my argument without ever addressing a single point I raise.

Cliff, easy there, son. If I'd a'thunk at all that the "LLL Generals and Cuban Kennedy Killers Killed Kennedy for to Get Cuba Invaded" model was your own private personal thing, I would have swept me hat off and bowed low before issuing a single pooh-pooh.

I did not think that; I was of the opinion that the notion is as popular as Cracker Jacks, and you were merely sharing a handful with your friends.

But in any case it is still my opinion that Cubans and their friends in high and low places had as much chance of "getting Cuba invaded" by slipping and slinking around Dallas, Texas for months, lying in wait for a president to show up, as they would have had in the Aleutian Island chain peeling whale blubber.

Your mileage may vary.

Ashton

P.S. I share your opinion of the triple Ls—but in something of a different, more realistic (IMHO) context. Lansdale was very instrumental in setting up the Pentagon Papers op—but you knew that, surely. Oops: I mentioned something in connection with Ellsberg here in the JFK assassination forum, and I'm afraid I'm going to now be Speered. Of course we all know that Ellsberg had nothing at all to do with the Kennedy murder, or the nuclear arms situation surrounding it.

Edited December 18, 2006 by Ashton Gray

[Cliff Varnell]

Cliff, throw Allen Dulles in there.

You bet. And what about Mr. George Bush of the CIA?

For whom did he work, really?

Lots of people. Not just Eastern Establishment types. Dulles and the Bushes

transcend the Yankee/Cowboy dichotomy, straddling both camps.

And, all the names you mentioned were loyal to Dulles.

Better believe it.

I believe all it took was one conversation between one (very rich and powerful) man and Dulles and the whole thing swung into being.

And the name of that man...

H. L. Hunt. Of course.

What, the only rich evil scumbags in the world come out of the "Eastern Establishment"?

Gimme a break. It's like blaming the all evils of the world on Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Again, for whom did Allen Dulles work?

Same folks as Mr. George Bush of the CIA. Pretty much. Lots of fingers in lots of pies.

Terry said it very well above. Who does the CIA really represent? Who does the U.S. military

really represent?

For the extremely wealthy there are no consequences - except, that is, between them and God.

I don't believe now that it really had anything to do with Cuba. It was a battle for control of the government - Cuba was a backdrop just like a lot of the other stuff. JFK was too smart for them, and they (the eastern established ruling class) would not allow everything they had to be taken away. Not one inch.

And what was John Kennedy taking away from the ruling eastern establishment?

Certainly not anything to do with Southeast Asian policy -- Harriman called the shots on

the Diem overthrow, with Lodge his man in Saigon 11/63. The "Eastern Establishment"

just scored a foreign policy victory -- the overthrow of the Diem regime in 'Nam -- and

then they turned right around and killed their own "Yankee" commander-in-chief?

Whom among the Eastern Establishment did JFK get into dutch?

Over what?

Jack, Bobby, and then Ted? No way.

Also, I think part of this was personal. JFK was slaughtered in public. There were so many other ways they could've taken him out.

They blew his brains out right in his wife's face.

That is hate, baby. Hate for Jackie.

I mean, just think about it. You have a hundred ways to kill the guy -- if that is the sole

motivation, to simply end JFK's life -- and the way you pick to do it involves blowing his

brains out with blood all over her pretty pink dress?

What does a corpse care if it was slaughtered in public or put to death in its sleep?

It had to be Jackie. They must have really hated her, these "Eastern Establishment"

perps.

Gee, except that the Bouvier's were Eastern Establishment, as well, weren't they?

Mean to each other, these "liberal Eastern Establishment" types...

He dared to take on the powers that be in a very reckless way -- very much like he lived the rest of his life.

The Rockefellers

The Morgans

The Lodges

Dean Acheson

Walt Rostow

The Bundys

Bankers and the War Party.

That's where I am today. FWIW.

You left out: W. Averell Harriman, Prescott Bush and his son George, and a guy

named Joe Kennedy.

I'd like to hear your argument that JFK had crossed any of the above in some

manner so grave that they'd facilitate his murder.

The only name above I see interested in Kennedy's death is Mr. George Bush of the CIA.

And that's because of CUBA.

[Cliff Varnell]

And when you're done thinking real hard about all that please note that I based my case

on PENTAGON documents. I hope no one here is denying the super aggressive posture

toward Cuba betrayed by Generals Lansdale, Lemnitzer, and LeMay.

I love it when people pooh-pooh my argument without ever addressing a single point I

raise.

Cliff,

I addressed your claim about Vietnam being incidental and you didn't even mention it.

I only had so much time this morning, Michael. Thank you for your response, as always.

I went to see my Oakland Raiders play the St. Louis Rams...painful beyond belief...anyway,

I've been responding to posts every since I got back.

I do think you make many good points, but Cuba was a relative drop in the bucket to

these guys. They wanted to nuke the Soviets and/or Red China. If Cuba could provide a pretext

for a larger conflict with the Soviets, all well and good. The JCS was much more concerned with

Mao Tse-tung and Kruschev than they ever were with Castro.

And yet they were plenty concerned with Castro, no? The Northwoods documents indicates

a high level of interest in establishing a pretext to invade Cuba and lo and behold up pops

Lee Oswald recently from Mexico City and his dance with the Commies...

I'm not a Co-Incidentalist.

The "nuke China" agenda wasn't necessarily shared with the rest of the perps. Each

had their own agenda -- with the super hawks they wanted a freer hand under LBJ --

but the one goal all shared was the immediate POLICY toward Cuba.

To claim that Vietnam was incidental without presenting a strong case weakens your overall argument, in my opinion.

I value your input, and I'll try harder, Michael.

[Cliff Varnell]

STAN: I don't believe now that it really had anything to do with Cuba.

ASHTON: Of course it didn't. Never had diddly to do with Cuba. Nor was the Bay of Pigs "invasion" for any of the reasons the CIA ever trotted out. Nor was there ever any CIA program to assassinate Castro. All long-after-the-fact dog-and-pony-show patented CIA limited hangout BS to cover what they really had been doing. If anybody thinks one syllable in this paragraph is sarcastic or facetious in the slightest, better pause and think again. Real hard.

...I love it when people pooh-pooh my argument without ever addressing a single point I raise.

Cliff, easy there, son. If I'd a'thunk at all that the "LLL Generals and Cuban Kennedy Killers Killed Kennedy for to Get Cuba Invaded" model was your own private personal thing, I would have swept me hat off and bowed low before issuing a single pooh-pooh.

I did not think that; I was of the opinion that the notion is as popular as Cracker Jacks, and you were merely sharing a handful with your friends.

Ashton, I cannot tell you how happy I am with this appraisal.

You are exactly correct. I certainly hope this notion is that popular. I arrived at it a bit

differently: I came to it through the throat wound. The throat wound made the case so

that I could join those who came before me, upon whose shoulders I stand.

I really am not one to *share* my Cracker Jacks, however. I'm more like the

kid who shows you that he has Cracker Jacks and he's going to eat them by himself.

But in any case it is still my opinion that Cubans and their friends in high and low places had as much chance of "getting Cuba invaded" by slipping and slinking around Dallas, Texas for months, lying in wait for a president to show up, as they would have had in the Aleutian Island chain peeling whale blubber.

Your mileage may vary.

Ashton

P.S. I share your opinion of the triple Ls—but in something of a different, more realistic (IMHO) context. Landsdale was very instrumental in setting up the Pentagon Papers op—but you knew that, surely. Oops: I mentioned something in connection with Ellsberg here in the JFK assassination forum, and I'm afraid I'm going to now be Speered. Of course we all know that Ellsberg had nothing at all to do with the Kennedy murder, or the nuclear arms situation surrounding it.

Edited December 18, 2006 by Cliff Varnell

[John Dolva]

And, lest we not forget those glad-handing, back-stabbers, the Harrimans.

Bingo! And let's not forget another little name that fits in there -- Joe Kennedy.

Joe Kennedy and W. Averell Harriman were pillars of the Eastern Establishment.

"Bankers and the War Party."

Probably where the term "War Chest" originated. JMHO

You know, it never ceases to amaze me of the lengths people will go to in their efforts to

continually skirt the issue of naming the REAL perps, the REAL people who had the supreme

and uncontested monumental control of the financial assets SO VERY NECESSARY

that they would never be held accountable, nor a bloody trail EVER be allowed traceable

back to their financial establishments and houses of the holy.

This is where the Carl Oglesby Yankee-Cowboy dichotomy applies, imo.

John Kennedy was a product of the Eastern Establishment. W. Averell Harriman was

the architect of State Dept policy in Southeast Asia -- got his way in Laos, and he got

his way in the overthrow of Diem in Vietnam.

W. Averell Harriman was a man used to getting his way. As long as he continued

to get his way I doubt that he'd want JFK murdered.

But, Terry, I'm open minded. If you can make a case for John Kennedy getting into

hot water with Harriman in 1963, I'd like to see it.

Steel.

Used in rail, auto, weaponry, shipping, construction, machinery, tooling to work steel, tools to fix all those, and boxes to keep the tools in. Basically war, transport and manufacturig. It's at the heart of so much. Including the Nazi links. Including the replacement of lost tonnage. Ie. don't even have to be in the war to reap massive profits.

http://laura-knight-jadczyk.blogspot.com/2...and-titans.html

"Businessmen . . . the President's action points inevitably to a federal dictatorship over business." - David Lawrence, US News and World Report.

_________

"The American people will find it hard, as I do, to accept a situation in which a tiny handful of steel executives whose pursuit of private power and profit exceeds their sense of public responsibility can show such utter contempt for the interests of 185 million Americans."

John F. Kennedy, April 11, 1962

[Cliff Varnell]

And, lest we not forget those glad-handing, back-stabbers, the Harrimans.

Bingo! And let's not forget another little name that fits in there -- Joe Kennedy.

Joe Kennedy and W. Averell Harriman were pillars of the Eastern Establishment.

"Bankers and the War Party."

Probably where the term "War Chest" originated. JMHO

You know, it never ceases to amaze me of the lengths people will go to in their efforts to

continually skirt the issue of naming the REAL perps, the REAL people who had the supreme

and uncontested monumental control of the financial assets SO VERY NECESSARY

that they would never be held accountable, nor a bloody trail EVER be allowed traceable

back to their financial establishments and houses of the holy.

This is where the Carl Oglesby Yankee-Cowboy dichotomy applies, imo.

John Kennedy was a product of the Eastern Establishment. W. Averell Harriman was

the architect of State Dept policy in Southeast Asia -- got his way in Laos, and he got

his way in the overthrow of Diem in Vietnam.

W. Averell Harriman was a man used to getting his way. As long as he continued

to get his way I doubt that he'd want JFK murdered.

But, Terry, I'm open minded. If you can make a case for John Kennedy getting into

hot water with Harriman in 1963, I'd like to see it.

Steel.

I don't buy it. After his dust up with the steel companies JFK worked very hard

to curry favor with the business community.

http://www.whitehousetapes.org/news/shreve_taxcut_2001.pdf

Note the names of the "prominent businessmen" who supported JFK's 1962 tax cut policy:

Tom Watson of IBM, Frederick Kappel of AT&T, and Henry Ford II of Ford Motor Co.

If those guys were on board with JFK economic policy, then JFK didn't get whacked by a

consortium of mainstream US businessmen, imo.

Used in rail, auto, weaponry, shipping, construction, machinery, tooling to work steel, tools to fix all those, and boxes to keep the tools in. Basically war, transport and manufacturig. It's at the heart of so much. Including the Nazi links. Including the replacement of lost tonnage. Ie. don't even have to be in the war to reap massive profits.

http://laura-knight-jadczyk.blogspot.com/2...and-titans.html

"Businessmen . . . the President's action points inevitably to a federal dictatorship over business." - David Lawrence, US News and World Report.

Whenever there is a moderate-liberal President and a Democratic Congress the business

community publicly frets over policy.

It's SOP. PR. Part of the job. JFK advocted a tax cut for business at the risk of budget deficits,

for cry'n out loud...

_________

"The American people will find it hard, as I do, to accept a situation in which a tiny handful of steel executives whose pursuit of private power and profit exceeds their sense of public responsibility can show such utter contempt for the interests of 185 million Americans."

John F. Kennedy, April 11, 1962

I think you can argue that Robert Blough, Chairman of US Steel, had a motive to murder

JFK because of the humiliating way he made Blough back-down on steel prices in spring 1962.

Can you argue that Robert Blough had the means and opportunity to murder JFK?

I'd argue HL Hunt as the top Evil-Rich-Perp, since he owned a building in Dealey Plaza, and

could wield influence with Dallas law enforcement.

But if you can tie Robert Blough to the events of Eleven Twenty Two -- I'm all ears.

&btw, David L. Lawrence was a Democrat.

[Cliff Varnell]

The throat wound made the case so

that I could join those who came before me, upon whose shoulders I stand.

I salute Gaeton Fonzi, Vincent Salandria, Jim Marrs, James Bamford,

Larry Hancock and Rex Bradford.

Many others are more than worthy, but these guys cracked the case, imo.

[Ashton Gray]

The primary goal of the JFK assassination was to establish a pre-text to invade Cuba.

For whom "to invade Cuba?"

I should have phrased that with more precision:

The primary goal of the JFK assassination was to establish a pre-text for a military invasion of Cuba.

You accomplished more precision; you still haven't answered the question:

For whom? For whose benefit? Ordered by whom? Run by whom? On whose authority?

Ashton

[Myra Bronstein]

...

I'd argue HL Hunt as the top Evil-Rich-Perp, since he owned a building in Dealey Plaza, and

could wield influence with Dallas law enforcement.

...

Cliff, Do you know which building HL Hunt owned in Dealey Plaza? Do the Hunts still own it?

Thanks.

[Cliff Varnell]

...

I'd argue HL Hunt as the top Evil-Rich-Perp, since he owned a building in Dealey Plaza, and

could wield influence with Dallas law enforcement.

...

Cliff, Do you know which building HL Hunt owned in Dealey Plaza? Do the Hunts still own it?

Thanks.

My understanding is that Hunt co-owned the Dal-Tex Building with Clint Murchison.

Should Jack White weigh in on this, that's the answer.

Edited December 18, 2006 by Cliff Varnell

[Dawn Meredith]

I disagree and do believe that Cuba was a cause. A cause, but THE cause, in a very simplistic way, was JFK's overall workings towards peace, not just with Cuba, but Russia, and attempting to end the war in Viet nam. Sadly, peace is never popular in this country with the powers that be. Some claim these pro-peace changes were the result of the acid Jack allegedly took, but I am more inclined to believe it was his own horrific experience in WW2 that motivated his sincere efforts at making this planet a safer and more peaceful place to raise our children.

Dawn

[Cliff Varnell]

I disagree and do believe that Cuba was a cause. A cause, but THE cause, in a very simplistic way, was JFK's overall workings towards peace, not just with Cuba, but Russia, and attempting to end the war in Viet nam. Sadly, peace is never popular in this country with the powers that be. Some claim these pro-peace changes were the result of the acid Jack allegedly took, but I am more inclined to believe it was his own horrific experience in WW2 that motivated his sincere efforts at making this planet a safer and more peaceful place to raise our children.

Dawn

Oswald was sheep-dipped two ways to Sunday as an agent of Fidel -- which indicates

to me a very narrow purpose.

We'll never know the elaborate file on Oswald that David Phillips possessed in Mexico City,

but Hoover's Oswald-the-Fidelista file sure was impressive.

I just can't buy the idea that JFK's death was arranged in that manner if the sole idea

was to kill him.

Can you imagine how pissed off Aristotle Onassis was when he found out that THEY

blew JFK's brains out right in the face of HIS, Ari O's, GIRLFRIEND??

Ari let it slide because [cue Al Pacino] it was business, Sonny.

[Cliff Varnell]

The primary goal of the JFK assassination was to establish a pre-text to invade Cuba.

For whom "to invade Cuba?"

I should have phrased that with more precision:

The primary goal of the JFK assassination was to establish a pre-text for a military invasion of Cuba.

You accomplished more precision; you still haven't answered the question:

All my posts on this thread count for nothing?

For whom?

Those with a vested interest in a US military take-over of Cuba. Mostly Cowboys, if I

may use Carl Oglesby's Yankee/Cowboy dichotomy, which, as I have noted elsewhere,

didn't apply to guys like Allen Dulles and Mr. George Bush of the CIA who straddled both

camps.

For whose benefit?

Depends on their proximity to pre-Castro business interests. I think J Edgar Hoover's

or Gen. LeMay's interests in a Cuban takeover were more ideological, whereas Bush

and Giancana may have found the ideological component incidental.

Ordered by whom?

I think Lansdale put it together initially on a "rogue" basis -- first stop, Mr. HL Hunt -- but by

game-time he had the blessing of LeMay, Hoover, Helms, Angleton, Johnson.

Run by whom?

Ed Lansdale, David Phillips, David Morales.

On whose authority?

[cue Treasure of the Sierra Madre]

"Badges? We don' need no steenkeen badges!!"

Edited December 18, 2006 by Cliff Varnell

[Dawn Meredith]

I disagree and do believe that Cuba was a cause. A cause, but THE cause, in a very simplistic way, was JFK's overall workings towards peace, not just with Cuba, but Russia, and attempting to end the war in Viet nam. Sadly, peace is never popular in this country with the powers that be. Some claim these pro-peace changes were the result of the acid Jack allegedly took, but I am more inclined to believe it was his own horrific experience in WW2 that motivated his sincere efforts at making this planet a safer and more peaceful place to raise our children.

Dawn

Oswald was sheep-dipped two ways to Sunday as an agent of Fidel -- which indicates

to me a very narrow purpose.

We'll never know the elaborate file on Oswald that David Phillips possessed in Mexico City,

but Hoover's Oswald-the-Fidelista file sure was impressive.

I just can't buy the idea that JFK's death was arranged in that manner if the sole idea

was to kill him.

Can you imagine how pissed off Aristotle Onassis was when he found out that THEY

blew JFK's brains out right in the face of HIS, Ari O's, GIRLFRIEND??

Ari let it slide because [cue Al Pacino] it was business, Sonny.

Cliff:

I agree absolutely that LHO was so obviously sheep-dipped. His so-called pro commie leanings were so transparent from the start that I find it difficult to believe that anyone ever bought such crap.

When I was doing research in 1974 for a college paper on this subject I came across a speech that Castro gave the day after the assassination. It's an incredibly aware speech. This remarkable speech was re-printed in Dr. Marty Schotz' wonderful "History Will Not Absolve Us". Castro "kew" why Kennedy was killed and his pro-peace stance was at the heart of it. Something the cold warriers did not want any part of. The speech is way too long for me to type and my printer with the scanner is not working, so if anyone should have this book and can post it I would be most grateful. It begins on p 54 of Marty's book and is titled "Concerning the Facts and Consequences of the Tragic Death of President John F. Kennedy".

Castro knew. JFK Jr. traveled to Cuba and met with Castro. I have no doubt that JFK's assassination was discussed. And the bastards then saw to it that one more "plane accident" would render JFK Jr.'s future political career dead. They just keep doing it and getting away with it. Whoever said the CIA (military intel etc. ) no longer kills got it wrong, imho.

Dawn

[Dawn Meredith]

I disagree and do believe that Cuba was a cause. A cause, but THE cause, in a very simplistic way, was JFK's overall workings towards peace, not just with Cuba, but Russia, and attempting to end the war in Viet nam. Sadly, peace is never popular in this country with the powers that be. Some claim these pro-peace changes were the result of the acid Jack allegedly took, but I am more inclined to believe it was his own horrific experience in WW2 that motivated his sincere efforts at making this planet a safer and more peaceful place to raise our children.

Dawn

Oswald was sheep-dipped two ways to Sunday as an agent of Fidel -- which indicates

to me a very narrow purpose.

We'll never know the elaborate file on Oswald that David Phillips possessed in Mexico City,

but Hoover's Oswald-the-Fidelista file sure was impressive.

I just can't buy the idea that JFK's death was arranged in that manner if the sole idea

was to kill him.

Can you imagine how pissed off Aristotle Onassis was when he found out that THEY

blew JFK's brains out right in the face of HIS, Ari O's, GIRLFRIEND??

Ari let it slide because [cue Al Pacino] it was business, Sonny.

Cliff:

I agree absolutely that LHO was so obviously sheep-dipped. His so-called pro commie leanings were so transparent from the start that I find it difficult to believe that anyone ever bought such crap.

When I was doing research in 1974 for a college paper on this subject I came across a speech that Castro gave the day after the assassination. It's an incredibly aware speech. This remarkable speech was re-printed in Dr. Marty Schotz' wonderful "History Will Not Absolve Us". Castro "kew" why Kennedy was killed and his pro-peace stance was at the heart of it. Something the cold warriers did not want any part of. The speech is way too long for me to type and my printer with the scanner is not working, so if anyone should have this book and can post it I would be most grateful. It begins on p 54 of Marty's book and is titled "Concerning the Facts and Consequences of the Tragic Death of President John F. Kennedy".

Castro knew. JFK Jr. traveled to Cuba and met with Castro. I have no doubt that JFK's assassination was discussed. And the bastards then saw to it that one more "plane accident" would render JFK Jr.'s future political career dead. They just keep doing it and getting away with it. Whoever said the CIA (military intel etc. ) no longer kills got it wrong, imho.

Dawn