Jump to content
The Education Forum

What should have been obvious


Recommended Posts

Once JFK was dead we should have realized RFK had to follow-he was too ruthless and too devoted to his brother to leave it allone. I was serving as a Mormon Missionary in Indiana when it happened-too bad we were so slow to grasp the obvious.

Edited by Evan Marshall
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Evan

I will agree with you that RFK was quite ruthless.

However, I feel that it is often misunderstood, that as a result of the better use of tact, the fact that JFK was both quite ruthless and reckless

is sometimes overlooked. They both were very much the proteges of "old Joe" and that both reacted when challenged quite agressively; tho JFK had the luxury of having RFK "front" his very strong reactions for the sake of diplomacy.

Yes I was a very young and quite "innocent" military officer on 11/22/63. In those days, it was pretty much forbidden that Military Officers voiced political opinions publicly...remember MacArthur !

I was at an overseas base when this occurred and I would like to clear up a couple of misconceptions that I personally KNOW are wrong. It was never considered by any of the "Brass" that this was a Soviet involved incident on the base where I was stationed. Contrary to popular belief, that even in our strategic location, we were placed on ALERT for no longer than three hours. I spent the night at home with my wife. There was no military concern of an impending war or attack. I am able to quite specifically judge this because I had recently been thru the chaos and high military readiness which had resulted from the Cuban Missile Crisis....we then were TRULY close to conflict.

Apart from the grief that most felt, the following days were "business as usual"! We were not on any elevated alert status.

As a matter of fact, in those first few days and months, the reports of the FBI were more or less considered Gospel....few comments to the contrary!

Evan, I managed to wander a little off topic. It is my personal belief (which I cannot substantiate), that there was little thought in the mind of RFK that there was any great mystery regarding what happened to his Brother. As a matter of fact, I feel that he thought that his personal actions and recommendations to the President contributed to the Coup. I feel that the both, "then and now" position, which has been taken by the Kennedy family, would not and possbly could not, be changed regardless of whether Robert reached the White House. This decision, I personally think, had a dual purpose....one was of course protecting Kennedy interests....the other however was the more overpowering reason....It was the very valid question and the imperceivable reaction of what would befall the U.S. government, were it known that a Coup d' Etat had been conducted by the highest elements of power within the U.S. Government, in accord with those who controlled the nations industry, oil, and banking.

Despite my constant "demands for truth", my deep belief is that the U.S. could not have taken it then, nor could it now.

It would be similar to saying there is no Santa Claus, no God, no hope, .....your father is a child predator and murderer, and your mother, sisters and grandmother are all whores, and that even tho there is no God, there is certainly a Satan who does and will always prevail.

I feel that this is but a "slight" exaggeration !

I feel that "A PORTION" of this cover up was truly conducted by Patriots, attempting to save "the remnants" of our nation from caving in upon itself.

I didn't intend to "sermonize" !

Charlie Black

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Evan

I will agree with you that RFK was quite ruthless.

However, I feel that it is often misunderstood, that as a result of the better use of tact, the fact that JFK was both quite ruthless and reckless

is sometimes overlooked. They both were very much the proteges of "old Joe" and that both reacted when challenged quite agressively; tho JFK had the luxury of having RFK "front" his very strong reactions for the sake of diplomacy.

Yes I was a very young and quite "innocent" military officer on 11/22/63. In those days, it was pretty much forbidden that Military Officers voiced political opinions publicly...remember MacArthur !

I was at an overseas base when this occurred and I would like to clear up a couple of misconceptions that I personally KNOW are wrong. It was never considered by any of the "Brass" that this was a Soviet involved incident on the base where I was stationed. Contrary to popular belief, that even in our strategic location, we were placed on ALERT for no longer than three hours. I spent the night at home with my wife. There was no military concern of an impending war or attack. I am able to quite specifically judge this because I had recently been thru the chaos and high military readiness which had resulted from the Cuban Missile Crisis....we then were TRULY close to conflict.

Apart from the grief that most felt, the following days were "business as usual"! We were not on any elevated alert status.

As a matter of fact, in those first few days and months, the reports of the FBI were more or less considered Gospel....few comments to the contrary!

Evan, I managed to wander a little off topic. It is my personal belief (which I cannot substantiate), that there was little thought in the mind of RFK that there was any great mystery regarding what happened to his Brother. As a matter of fact, I feel that he thought that his personal actions and recommendations to the President contributed to the Coup. I feel that the both, "then and now" position, which has been taken by the Kennedy family, would not and possbly could not, be changed regardless of whether Robert reached the White House. This decision, I personally think, had a dual purpose....one was of course protecting Kennedy interests....the other however was the more overpowering reason....It was the very valid question and the imperceivable reaction of what would befall the U.S. government, were it known that a Coup d' Etat had been conducted by the highest elements of power within the U.S. Government, in accord with those who controlled the nations industry, oil, and banking.

Despite my constant "demands for truth", my deep belief is that the U.S. could not have taken it then, nor could it now.

It would be similar to saying there is no Santa Claus, no God, no hope, .....your father is a child predator and murderer, and your mother, sisters and grandmother are all whores, and that even tho there is no God, there is certainly a Satan who does and will always prevail.

I feel that this is but a "slight" exaggeration !

I feel that "A PORTION" of this cover up was truly conducted by Patriots, attempting to save "the remnants" of our nation from caving in upon itself.

I didn't intend to "sermonize" !

Charlie Black

Hi Charlie,

I agree with you that we DID believe the FBI back then. But the cover up of the JFK assasination changed our view of the FBI -- especially when we found out how they only wanted evidence that coincided with the "official" story. Also when we found that evidence that opposed the "official" story was soon lost or misplaced, never to be seen or heard of again. After that we began to view the FBI with suspicion. This suspicion only increased after their handling of MLK assasination and Bobby Kennedy assasination.

If we had exposed the truth of what happened rather than force-feeding a lie to the American public then perhaps the American public would have faith in the leadership, or the judicial system, rather than viewing it as a corrupt system that protects the rich and powerful.

Yes, for some of us it would be a tremendous shock, but we wouldn't be living in denial as we are now, suppossedly believing that some poor schmuck who tested negative for nitrates on his cheek fired three times from a rifle with a crooked scope and killed Kennedy with a lucky shot.

-- Bill Grote

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Evan

I will agree with you that RFK was quite ruthless.

However, I feel that it is often misunderstood, that as a result of the better use of tact, the fact that JFK was both quite ruthless and reckless

is sometimes overlooked. They both were very much the proteges of "old Joe" and that both reacted when challenged quite agressively; tho JFK had the luxury of having RFK "front" his very strong reactions for the sake of diplomacy.

Yes I was a very young and quite "innocent" military officer on 11/22/63. In those days, it was pretty much forbidden that Military Officers voiced political opinions publicly...remember MacArthur !

I was at an overseas base when this occurred and I would like to clear up a couple of misconceptions that I personally KNOW are wrong. It was never considered by any of the "Brass" that this was a Soviet involved incident on the base where I was stationed. Contrary to popular belief, that even in our strategic location, we were placed on ALERT for no longer than three hours. I spent the night at home with my wife. There was no military concern of an impending war or attack. I am able to quite specifically judge this because I had recently been thru the chaos and high military readiness which had resulted from the Cuban Missile Crisis....we then were TRULY close to conflict.

Apart from the grief that most felt, the following days were "business as usual"! We were not on any elevated alert status.

As a matter of fact, in those first few days and months, the reports of the FBI were more or less considered Gospel....few comments to the contrary!

Evan, I managed to wander a little off topic. It is my personal belief (which I cannot substantiate), that there was little thought in the mind of RFK that there was any great mystery regarding what happened to his Brother. As a matter of fact, I feel that he thought that his personal actions and recommendations to the President contributed to the Coup. I feel that the both, "then and now" position, which has been taken by the Kennedy family, would not and possbly could not, be changed regardless of whether Robert reached the White House. This decision, I personally think, had a dual purpose....one was of course protecting Kennedy interests....the other however was the more overpowering reason....It was the very valid question and the imperceivable reaction of what would befall the U.S. government, were it known that a Coup d' Etat had been conducted by the highest elements of power within the U.S. Government, in accord with those who controlled the nations industry, oil, and banking.

Despite my constant "demands for truth", my deep belief is that the U.S. could not have taken it then, nor could it now.

It would be similar to saying there is no Santa Claus, no God, no hope, .....your father is a child predator and murderer, and your mother, sisters and grandmother are all whores, and that even tho there is no God, there is certainly a Satan who does and will always prevail.

I feel that this is but a "slight" exaggeration !

I feel that "A PORTION" of this cover up was truly conducted by Patriots, attempting to save "the remnants" of our nation from caving in upon itself.

I didn't intend to "sermonize" !

Charlie Black

That was well put, Charlie. I believe that Robert Kennedy was the President's worst enemy, not meaning to be, of course. But going after the mob when they (supposedly) helped Kennedy get into the White House through the Chicago elections. He should have dropped it. It was like a pissing war, excuse the phrase, between RFK and Hoffa/Giancana, etc.

Also, the Marilyn Monroe thing. I have read so many sources that contradict one another. But that woman died at the age of 36. Who killed her? I don't know, but it seemed like the Kennedys were involved some way. Robert requested that Marilyn sing Happy Birthday to the President. When it appeared in the papers the next day, he decided to cut her off. But he was the one who invited her in the first place!

I've read some other disturbing things about Robert. I don't know what's true. One book that came out this year -- possibly Ultimate Sacrifice by Joan Mellon -- said Bobby Kennedy and several Cuban Exiles were planning to assassinate Castro without the President knowing about it.

Isn't it strange that John Kennedy's assassination didn't put the military on alert?

Kathy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[...] Isn't it strange that John Kennedy's assassination didn't put the military on alert?

______________________________________

Charlie said that his base was put on alert after the assassination, though not for very long...

--Thomas

______________________________________

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[...] Isn't it strange that John Kennedy's assassination didn't put the military on alert?

______________________________________

Charlie said that his base was put on alert after the assassination, though not for very long...

--Thomas

______________________________________

I think RFK knew who his enimes were and by extension who did the deed-I've always thought the Bay of Pigs/CIA mix is at the center of it. prior to leaving the University of Southern California to serve my Mission I had started to examine the mess known as the Warren Commission and knew enough about guns even then to have real issues with the MC and Oswald. As a graduate in History, I'm fully aware that History is written by the "Winners".

It severely disapponts me though it doesn't surprise me that Blakey who had worked for RFK whimped out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[...] Isn't it strange that John Kennedy's assassination didn't put the military on alert?

______________________________________

Charlie said that his base was put on alert after the assassination, though not for very long...

--Thomas

______________________________________

Thomas, they were put on alert for 3 hours. Surely they had Harvey Oswald in custody by then. The "lone" assassin. Charles also said no one on the base thought the Russians or Cuba had anything to do with it.

Kathy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Kathy

You grasped my meaning perfectly. If forward bases were taken off of alert within a few hours, the Military Brass "KNEW" immediately that we were not facing a Soviet threat.

That is why it is with such disgust that I review LBJ's pleading with prospective Warren Commission members, many days later, that their help was needed in averting a a potential Nuclear crisis.

Everyone in the Military, the FBI, and the various intelligence agencies well knew that no such crisis existed. As a matter of fact, I was permitted to go "on leave" before the Warren Commission was even appointed.

The more of the normal day to day activities immediately following the assassintion that one is aware of, the more the immediate "cover up" and its subsequent lies is so obviously apparent.

Except for many in other countries that were aware of the Coup, our countrymen were completely snowed.

I and all of my military acquaintences absolutely initially believed the FBI, and that Lee Harvey Oswald was an unbalanced, malcontent, crazed, lone nut MISFIT. We knew nothing of the Manlicher Carcano piece of junk. We were told that his was a very easy shot for an ex Marine Marksman, with a scoped military weapon, from the ridiculous distance of "only 70 yards". The "more military" in which one was involved, the easier it was to believe the fodder that was fed us. Why in 1963 would any of us young military men not have believed the FBI, and the near "god like" American hero, J. Edgar Hoover ?

I was hooked like a stupid mud fish !

Charlie Black

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Charles Black' wrote:

Hello Evan

I will agree with you that RFK was quite ruthless.

However, I feel that it is often misunderstood, that as a result of the better use of tact, the fact that JFK was both quite ruthless and reckless

is sometimes overlooked. They both were very much the proteges of "old Joe" and that both reacted when challenged quite agressively; tho JFK had the luxury of having RFK "front" his very strong reactions for the sake of diplomacy.

Yes I was a very young and quite "innocent" military officer on 11/22/63. In those days, it was pretty much forbidden that Military Officers voiced political opinions publicly...remember MacArthur !

I was at an overseas base when this occurred and I would like to clear up a couple of misconceptions that I personally KNOW are wrong. It was never considered by any of the "Brass" that this was a Soviet involved incident on the base where I was stationed. Contrary to popular belief, that even in our strategic location, we were placed on ALERT for no longer than three hours. I spent the night at home with my wife. There was no military concern of an impending war or attack. I am able to quite specifically judge this because I had recently been thru the chaos and high military readiness which had resulted from the Cuban Missile Crisis....we then were TRULY close to conflict.

Apart from the grief that most felt, the following days were "business as usual"! We were not on any elevated alert status.

dgh:In Vietnam (Saigon specific) it was a different matter, we were on *heightened* alert during the month of November 1963, what with the Deim overthrow earlier in the month. When Kennedy was assassinated it was FULL in-country alert for a few days... From US Army MAAG personnel perspective not much changed, the wise remained on full alert, ALL the time.

As a matter of fact, in those first few days and months, the reports of the FBI were more or less considered Gospel....few comments to the contrary!

dgh: we saw nothing but Stars and Stripes till Christmas time that year, I don't recall anything concerning the FBI...

Evan, I managed to wander a little off topic. It is my personal belief (which I cannot substantiate), that there was little thought in the mind of RFK that there was any great mystery regarding what happened to his Brother. As a matter of fact, I feel that he thought that his personal actions and recommendations to the President contributed to the Coup. I feel that the both, "then and now" position, which has been taken by the Kennedy family, would not and possbly could not, be changed regardless of whether Robert reached the White House. This decision, I personally think, had a dual purpose....one was of course protecting Kennedy interests....the other however was the more overpowering reason....It was the very valid question and the imperceivable reaction of what would befall the U.S. government, were it known that a Coup d' Etat had been conducted by the highest elements of power within the U.S. Government, in accord with those who controlled the nations industry, oil, and banking.

Despite my constant "demands for truth", my deep belief is that the U.S. could not have taken it then, nor could it now.

It would be similar to saying there is no Santa Claus, no God, no hope, .....your father is a child predator and murderer, and your mother, sisters and grandmother are all whores, and that even tho there is no God, there is certainly a Satan who does and will always prevail.

I feel that this is but a "slight" exaggeration !

I feel that "A PORTION" of this cover up was truly conducted by Patriots, attempting to save "the remnants" of our nation from caving in upon itself.

I didn't intend to "sermonize" !

Charlie Black

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi David

Yes, I would suppose that the time proximity of the Diem and Kennedy Coups along with the instability that had been existing for some time, coupled with the the influence which was being force managed by the CIA, must have turned that bad situation into a pure horror !

I suppose that "hellish" is probably an understatement, since it lasted for the next 12 years !

Charlie Black

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...