Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

JFK Assasination

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bo Archer
    replied
    Let me do a little examination and speculation on the John Newman material. Exactly, who is duping who in the exceptional time period? Were the Dulles brothers (State Department/CIA) duping Eisenhower in trying to cut a secret deal with Castro for their corporate interest and fellow elites? Was Eisenhower in on the said operation but allowed to have a plausible deniability so as to protect his legacy? Did Castro dupe the Dulles brothers, while duping Eisenhower in another way, in the end Castro duped them all?

    Another interesting aspect is it appears possible the Bay of Pigs event was cleverly crafted and modified, upon the surprise JFK victory, so as to ensnare JFK. This event being the child born unto Eisenhower/Nixon and Allen Dulles/CIA but dumped in JFK lap. There is serious research pointing to the good chance that the fatally flawed Bay of Pig invasion was placed upon JFK, so that once it was being defeated, JFK would be compelled/forced to invade with U.S. ground troops. Thusly, destroying the Cuba Revolution and regaining corporate properties of U.S. companies. Its additional benefit would, be it failed or victorious, it would remove the highly feared outcome of the Republican war hero Eisenhower being blame for the loss of Cuba to the communists.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bo Archer
    replied
    Yet more from John Newman of same source about Eisenhower's panic and anger:

    "On 26 December (1958), Eisenhower held a RESTRICTED MEETING with ALLEN DULLES, the White House Staff Secretary, Andrew Goodpaster, and the Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, Gordon Gray. According to the minutes of this meeting, Eisenhower WENT ON A TEAR. He CRITICIZED the way Cuban policy had been handled (DULLES BROTHERS) and he ordered the unfolding CIA-Barquin covert plan (ALLEN DULLES's secret coup against Castro) to be very closely held. Eisenhower COMPLAINED that, "FOR ONE REASON OR ANOTHER THE MAIN ELEMENTS OF THE CUBAN SITUATION HAD NOT BEEN PRESENTED TO HIM," and added he intended to speak to Secretary of State JOHN FOSTER DULLES about this. Eisenhower ADMONISHED those present not to go into the "the specifics of covert operations" in the NSC."

    Leave a comment:


  • Bo Archer
    replied
    Let us look at another peek at the brilliant work of John Newman's book: WHERE ANGELS TREAD LIGHTLY:

    "Once Castro assumed power on 1 January 1959, the threat of communist penetration in his new government soon became the dominant issue in American Cuban policy. Eisenhower's admonishment of the State Department (John Foster Dulles) for its failure to understand this threat loomed especially large over those officers who had earlier ARGUED THAT THERE WAS NO SUCH THREAT. As we will see in Chapter Five, Undersecretary of State Herter turned to FBI Director Hoover for help. The embarrassing failure of the CIA's plan (ALLEN DULLES) to block Castro's rise to power left senior CIA officers nervous about this threat tool. According to the Deputy Director for Operations (CIA) Richard Bissell, "The general feeling in intelligence circles when Batista fell was that, although Castro's brother Raul was a dedicated communist, Castro himself was not. It became critically important to confirm or disprove this assessment.

    The point that needs to be emphasized is that Castro understood and nurtured the uncertainty that swirled around his potential communist leanings. Journalist Tad Szulc believed that Castro, "in the interest of a higher cause," was applying the Marxist concept of "historical justification" to conceal his true purpose until the "right moment."

    Leave a comment:


  • joea
    replied
    Originally posted by Poor Old Spike View Post
    Good point, if Oswald was a hired assassin by the the power elites, they'd have made sure to provide him with an expensive super-duper modern sniper rifle.
    So the fact that he used an old second hand $29.95 Carcano rifle shoots down the 'hired hitman' conspiracy theory..
    Unless he was not meant to do the actual deed?

    Leave a comment:


  • Poor Old Spike
    replied
    Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
    ..Starting with the weapon of choice. Of all the Surplus rifles out there he picked a piece of ****. In the same time period I had a K91 and a friend had two Lee–Enfield. Both far and away superior rifles.
    Good point, if Oswald was a hired assassin by the the power elites, they'd have made sure to provide him with an expensive super-duper modern sniper rifle.
    So the fact that he used an old second hand $29.95 Carcano rifle shoots down the 'hired hitman' conspiracy theory..

    Leave a comment:


  • Half Pint John
    replied
    Originally posted by joea View Post
    Quite so...most conspiracy theories are tin foil but the smoke around the JFK case has not dissipated in the decades since his assassination, the fine gents on this thread have posted lots of credible evidence and sources that demolish the accepted story IMHO. I have to check out that novel you mention, hopefully available on Amazon etc. in e-format.
    I got my copy from Amazon, put paperback. I would guess they have what you need. The author has a great command of English.

    Leave a comment:


  • Poor Old Spike
    replied
    Originally posted by Bo Archer View Post
    Poor Old Spike

    I rarely engage in juvenile bantering over such serious subjects. It appears to me that you are in need of some serious research and reading upon the subject matter. I have asked you nicely what your position is on the subject and got silence..
    I'm still trying to decide my stance and I was hoping you could help me decide.
    You seem to subscribe to the conspiracy theory that the big US arms dealers felt Kennedy was too soft about Vietnam, so they made a secret agreement with LBJ that they'd have Kennedy assassinated if LBJ promised to escalate the war.
    But the fact is that Kennedy was already escalating the war, so surely the power elites wouldn't want to bump him off?
    Kennedy was convinced that if South Vietnam fell to communism, then other states in the region would too, domino fashion.
    In 1961, Kennedy financed an increase in the size of the South Vietnamese Army from 150,000 to 170,000, and he was also sending more and more military "advisors" to Vietnam so that by the end of 1962 there were 12,000 advisors in South Vietnam.
    Oh, and where do you think Oswald fitted into the picture, was he a lone gunman or hired assassin?

    PS- thanks for calling me "juvenile", but it's been 50 years since I was a callow youth, and I went on to become a moderator at several military/wargaming forums such as this one..-

    Last edited by Poor Old Spike; 17 Oct 17, 14:50.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bo Archer
    replied
    Poor Old Spike

    I rarely engage in juvenile bantering over such serious subjects. It appears to me that you are in need of some serious research and reading upon the subject matter. I am not the subject of interrogation except in serious debates. I have asked you nicely what your position is on the subject and got silence. We on this thread have offered many references to those interested. If you got a position presented, back it up with your sources cited, and hopefully advance an intelligent thesis. Give it your best shot!

    Leave a comment:


  • joea
    replied
    Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
    I'm usually not much for the conspiracy items but JFK's murder is the exception.

    Starting with the weapon of choice. Of all the Surplus rifles out there he picked a piece of ****. In the same time period I had a K91 and a friend had two Lee–Enfield. Both far and away superior rifles.

    I'm in the process of reading a fiction titled "The Third Bullet"" buy Steven Hunter. It brings out many good questions about the killing.
    Quite so...most conspiracy theories are tin foil but the smoke around the JFK case has not dissipated in the decades since his assassination, the fine gents on this thread have posted lots of credible evidence and sources that demolish the accepted story IMHO. I have to check out that novel you mention, hopefully available on Amazon etc. in e-format.

    Leave a comment:


  • Poor Old Spike
    replied
    Originally posted by Bo Archer View Post
    ..JFK had a visionary mind and it took a massive criminal conspiracy to destroy him.
    Thanks, let's see if I understand you correctly- you seem to be saying that the big US arms dealers felt Kennedy was too soft about Vietnam, so they made a secret agreement with LBJ that they'd have Kennedy assassinated if LBJ promised to massively escalate the war?

    Leave a comment:


  • Bo Archer
    replied
    Here's more from same source and one can literally sense the panic in the air with the Eisenhower State over the fact that the evidence is very large that they lost Cuba to a communist insurgency:

    "On 4 January (1959), Washington ordered Ambassador Smith to return to the U.S., which he did on 6 January. In a 7 January memo to the President, Sec. of State JOHN FOSTER DULLES asked for Eisenhower's "authorization to take the necessary steps to recognize the present Provisional Government of Cuba.' Ambassador Smith returned to Havana that same day. Two days later, on January, Smith sent an uncharacteristic optimistic assessment to Washington stating that there was NO DANGER OF A DICTATORSHIP EMERGING IN CUBA because a government only becomes dictatorial when it lacks the support of the people, "and this government has the support of all Cubans." Smith added, "This government, and the revolutionary movement, will be honest. They will never defraud the Cuban people." On 11 January, Smith received a cable from Washington stating that Eisenhower had ordered his removal. The QUESTION OF BLAME AND CONSEQUENT RECRIMINATION LED TO A "FAIR AMOUNT OF PANIC" in the U.S. policy making apparatus and intelligence community. Moreover, things were going to get much worse."

    Leave a comment:


  • Bo Archer
    replied
    I would like to continue with the examination by way of the outstanding work of JOHN NEWMAN from his book: WHERE ANGELS TREAD LIGHTLY:

    "Another problem in Washington was also reaching critical mass: NO ONE HAD BRIEFED EISENHOWER ON THE EXTENT OF THE POTENTIAL COMMUNIST PROBLEM IN CUBA. The President would not be told of the extent of this problem until plans for evacuating Americans dependents were underway"

    "At the 23 December (1958) meeting of the NSC, CIA chief ALLEN DULLES finally let the cat out of the bag with respect to the Castro-communist problem that was unfolding in Cuba. Dulles informed Eisenhower about the extent of communist penetration in Cuba. Eisenhower WAS UPSET that he had not been properly informed."

    "Dulles stated flatly, "we ought to prevent a Castro victory." But by this time, events in Cuba were beyond the control of Washington."

    Leave a comment:


  • Bo Archer
    replied
    Poor Old Spike

    The key point you are making is a Deep State propaganda point: that JFK is responsible for the U.S. ground war in Vietnam and not Eisenhower or LBJ. Only in recent history have we now have the solid documentation in which it is known that JFK was withdrawing from Vietnam totally by 1965. He had ordered a partial beginning in 1963 but rest had to wait until after his re-election year 1964. If you want the proof read John Newman's book JFK AND VIETNAM: DECEPTION, INTRIGUE, AND THE STRUGGLE FOR POWER. Naturally there are many more sources.

    Your other points made are valid but the proper and historically correct spin is different from the false Deep State spin. This is easily explained: JFK wanted the South Vietnamese to fight their own war without U.S. ground troops. JFK was a believer in counter-insurgency which in Vietnam means using CIA, trainers, advisors. JFK took serious his own personal study of the French operations in Indochina and understood that a land invasion by U.S. ground forces would have the same results as had the French. The others were too arrogant and bigoted in their views of the Vietnamese and for that matter the French plus no understanding of history (typical American behavior). JFK had a visionary mind and it took a massive criminal conspiracy to destroy him.

    Leave a comment:


  • Poor Old Spike
    replied
    Originally posted by Bo Archer View Post
    ...powerful right wing power elites. They rewarded him [LBJ] with money and political support for his rise to power. He gave them their desire for War in Vietnam..
    Kennedy was escalating the war in Nam, so surely the power elites wouldn't want to bump him off?
    Kennedy was convinced that if South Vietnam fell to communism, then other states in the region would too, domino fashion.
    In 1961, Kennedy financed an increase in the size of the South Vietnamese Army from 150,000 to 170,000.
    He was sending more and more military "advisors" to Vietnam so that by the end of 1962 there were 12,000 advisors in South Vietnam.
    Last edited by Poor Old Spike; 15 Oct 17, 07:45.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bo Archer
    replied
    Poor Old Spike

    One should think of LBJ as the Deep State's tool that is bought and paid for to use. Mr. Caro has a three vol. set of books on LBJ life in which may be of interest to you. LBJ freely went about and enrolled himself in the service of some of the most powerful elites in the State of Texas and for the World for that matter. Most were powerful Oil Barons and I believe the Brown and Root Corporation and Bell Aircraft Corporation. Both the latter gained great wealth in the Vietnam War. The suspected sniper nests in the Daley Plaza kill zone had one located in Oil Baron D. Harold Byrd building and another one across the street that had a floor rented to H.L. Hunt, another Texas Oil Baron. All connected to LBJ by money and influence.

    LBJ was a Democrat Party man but was of the old school variety. His hero was FDR but LBJ never became a FDR type. To obtain money and resources to become politically powerful LBJ had to sell his soul to these powerful right wing power elites. They rewarded him with money and political support for his rise to power. He gave them their desire for War in Vietnam to keep communism from overrunning southeast Asia especially rich in resources Indonesia region. There were trillions of dollars to be made and were made by these power elites at the high cost of millions of lives.

    It always seen remarkable to me that LBJ got his watered down Great Society reforms passed mainly by marketing it as a prevention device to let off the pressure from having a true Marxist revolutionary threat within the United States. The right wing power elites went along with it due to that said fear. Naturally it was counter weight with harsh law and order regulations and Jim Crow II so called Drug War making prison incarceration rates explode plus flooding the nation with cheap narcotics. LBJ was a racist but was of the paternalistic type. He promoted reform to have his cherished legacy as a great man like FDR. He was an anti Communist crusader of the old school type for which he held in common with his Oil Baron friends and other power elites.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X