Jump to content


Photo

JFK Assassination

JFK Assassination JFK Assassination

  • Please log in to reply
57 replies to this topic

#41 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,070 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 22 February 2015 - 01:02 PM

As for your suggestion that Helms was originally against the Bay of Pigs, can you site a source for this assertion? If the source is Helms, himself, I am unaware of it. But, even if he is the source, his "oral history" is often self-serving. The following excerpts are from the CIA's Studies in Intelligence--Helms interview with David Frost. Note his assertion that the CIA has never assassinated anyone! I suppose one could stretch the truth to allow this to be technically true: "The Agency" is not a human. It's like saying a B-52 never killed anyone. That's true. An airplane can't kill anyone in terms of intent or taking deliberate action. Only a person can deliberately kill (assassinate) another person. But it is still a disingenuously, false, statement.

 

As Colonel Prouty often reminds us, "Nobody in Washington said, 'Shoot Diem.' You don't do an assassination that way. The way people are assassinated is by taking away the power that has been created to keep them there. It's a lot easier that way." -- So when the Agency leaks the rumor that the United States is changing its policy and pulling its support from someone like Diem, for instance, then his elite guard--that was trained in may cases by the Agency--begins to relax its protection.

 

Of particular interest to me is Helms' appeal--in not so many words--to the doctrine that: "The end always justifies the means." (page 26) He says, while referring to the assassination of particularly nefarious individuals, that: "We don't notice if laws are broken in the best causes."

 

The interviewer, David Frost's comments and questions (below) are in italics and Richard Helms' comments and responses are in regular text.

 

=========================================================================================================

 

Helms1.jpg

Helms2.jpg

Helms3.jpg

Helms4.jpg

Helms5.jpg

Helms6.jpg

Helms7.jpg

Helms8.jpg


_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#42 Charles Drago

Charles Drago

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,116 posts
  • LocationWherever I am observed by myself.

Posted 22 February 2015 - 05:16 PM

As for your suggestion that Helms was originally against the Bay of Pigs, can you site a source for this assertion?

 

From memory -- David Atlee Phillips' The Night Watch.

 

I'll try to track down the page number...

 

The prosecution rests.


"[Y]ou can't blame the innocent, they are always guiltless. All you can do is control them or eliminate them. Innocence is a kind of insanity." -- Graham Greene, The Quiet American

"If an individual, through either his own volition or events over which he had no control, found himself taking up residence in a country undefined by flags or physical borders, he could be assured of one immediate and abiding consequence. He was on his own, and solitude and loneliness would probably be his companions unto the grave." -- James Lee Burke, Rain Gods

a wind has blown the rain away and blown
the sky away and all the leaves away,
and the trees stand. i think i too have known
autumn too long
-- e. e. cummings

#43 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,070 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 22 February 2015 - 05:24 PM

[But the persecution is only beginning.]

 

(Cliff's comments are in this color; mine are in black).

 

If the plan had succeeded why would anyone care that Dulles was in Langley or not?  In fact, why would anyone care whether it was viewed as a CIA plan?

Success has a thousand fathers, failure is an orphan.  Winning is everything, and winners don't apologize.

 

Had the BOP been a success without direct US military intervention the controlled news story would have focused on the Cuban People's liberation from Castro due to the valiant effort of Cuban exiles (Brigade 2506) in conjunction with a general uprising from within Cuba. In this way, the US could plausibly deny responsibility. Victory, in this case, as well as in any other covert action, does not reside solely in the success of the military operation, but also in the War of Words: Propaganda. On the other side of the coin, freeing Cuba of Castro would not have been in our "best interest" if it could be plausibly attributed to the United States by the Soviet Union. The Soviets would have claimed it was another example of the danger that American Imperialism posed to the world. More importantly, it very likely would have triggered a retaliatory response from Khrushchev vis-à-vis Berlin and it would have been very difficult for the United States' "kettle" to call the Soviet Union's "pot" black. So if the invasion had succeeded while Dulles was out of the country to give a speech in Puerto Rico (ostensibly his alibi), it would add to our ability to plausibly deny complicity (even though I believe that it was really just a fall back position for him to use when the "planned failure" occurred).

 

Bingo!  His absence was a significant factor in the plan's failure.  It looks as if the powers-that-be wanted the BOP operation to go forward in a manner that would guarantee its failure.

And guarantee there would be a new DCI, DDCI, and DDP.

 

I agree that his absence contributed to the failure in that he was unreachable. However, as I said, I don't give him the benefit of the doubt by asserting he was merely seeking an alibi. Still, the "seeking an alibi" was certainly his "cover-story" when later confronted as to why he was incommunicado. It was a "cover story" that JFK did not accept. I also agree that the BOP was designed to fail, but I believe that Dulles was one of those desiring it to fail unless JFK could be compromised into using direct US military might. Had JFK intervened militarily, the "other" goals of this Intel Op would now be apparent. Primary goal: Remove Castro. Secondary goal: Compromise the Executive Branch. Third goal: Condition JFK to go along with the old boys network. Fourth goal: Move on to South East Asia (where Harriman wanted to focus in the first place). Your "leap" that asserts the BOP failure was designed to remove Dulles, et al, ignores the secondary and tertiary goals inherent to all covert intelligence ops.

 

Lovett was the heavy of the piece.  He was the one with the motive, means and opportunity to sabotage the CIA career of one Allen Dulles.

 

That statement begs the question. We are discussing the merits of whether or not the purpose of deliberately failing the Bay of Pigs was to get rid of Dulles. You are assuming (above) that Dulles was the main objective and then identifying Lovett as the one with the motive, means and opportunity to pull it off. It is a circular argument and therefore fallacious.

 

How could Dulles sit still and let someone [Rusk] obviously antagonistic assume the Highest Authority?

 
Because Rusk and Dulles were on the same page. Neither wanted it to succeed, but for different reasons. Dulles had a "fall back" position. Put another way, if Dulles was available he probably wouldn't have needed to consult with the President. He would never have misjudged the pre-dawn airstrikes to be anything less than crucial to success. And if he had pretended, as Rusk did, not to know their importance, nobody would have believed him in the aftermath. So had he been available he would have either told Bundy to piss up a rope or he would have personally called the President. That assumes he wanted the mission to succeed. But he didn't want it to succeed (unless the success compromised JFK). So by not being available, Dulles circumvents the hot seat by leaving it to Rusk. And Dean Rusk was better positioned to weather that storm (the aftermath) than Dulles by appearing too ignorant to have known how important the airstrikes were to success. After all, Rusk was not of a military mind nor of an intelligence mind.
 
Joe Kennedy and Robert Lovett wanted Dulles gone.

 

From the Center for the Study of Intelligence Newsletter Spring 1995 Issue No. 3

The Elusive ``Bruce-Lovett Report''

 
(Among those signing this statement was another board member, Joseph P. Kennedy. "I know that outfit," the ambassador said after the Bay of Pigs, "and I wouldn't pay them a hundred bucks a week. It's a lucky thing they were found out early.")
 
This quote from Joe Kennedy came AFTER the Bay of Pigs. It does not prove that he wanted Dulles out before the Bay of Pigs, and it is certainly ludicrous to suggest that Joe would compromise his own son's authority in a plot to get rid of Dulles by conspiring with Lovett to sabotage the Bay of Pigs!
 
Geez you're exhausting.

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#44 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,070 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 22 February 2015 - 06:32 PM

[But the persecution is only beginning.]

 

(Cliff's comments are in this color and blue; mine are in black and green).

 

If the plan had succeeded why would anyone care that Dulles was in Langley or not?  In fact, why would anyone care whether it was viewed as a CIA plan?

Success has a thousand fathers, failure is an orphan.  Winning is everything, and winners don't apologize.

 

Had the BOP been a success without direct US military intervention the controlled news story would have focused on the Cuban People's liberation from Castro due to the valiant effort of Cuban exiles (Brigade 2506) in conjunction with a general uprising from within Cuba. In this way, the US could plausibly deny responsibility. Victory, in this case, as well as in any other covert action, does not reside solely in the success of the military operation, but also in the War of Words: Propaganda.

 

Good point regarding US fingerprints, but what impact would the location of Allen Dulles have on the post-operation focus on "the Cuban People's liberation from Castro due to the valiant effort of Cuban exiles (Brigade 2506) in conjunction with a general uprising from within Cuba."

 

What hay was to be made out of Dulles being on his job at Langley, if the operation were a success?

 

One last try: Nobody would believe that Dulles would be out of the country to give a speech at a Puerto Rican University IF THIS WAS A CIA OPERATION!!!! So it is a preemptive strike against Soviet propaganda. 

 

 

On the other side of the coin, freeing Cuba of Castro would not have been in our "best interest" if it could be plausibly attributed to the United States by the Soviet Union. 

 

 

And having Allen Dulles at his desk in Virginia was going to ID the CIA and give the Soviet Union cause for blaming it all on the Americans?

 

No! That's not what I said. Having him ABSENT from his desk makes the claim that it was his operation appear ludicrous.

 

This rationale of yours is weak tea, with all due respect.

 

Your inability to grasp it is not credible.

 

 

The Soviets would have claimed it was another example of the danger that American Imperialism posed to the world. More importantly, it very likely would have triggered a retaliatory response from Khrushchev vis-à-vis Berlin and it would have been very difficult for the United States' "kettle" to call the Soviet Union's "pot" black.

 

Allen Dulles at his desk wouldn't have raised any such fuss.

 

Now, either you are dense or just trying to convince me of it. 

 

Bingo!  His absence was a significant factor in the plan's failure.  It looks as if the powers-that-be wanted the BOP operation to go forward in a manner that would guarantee its failure.

And guarantee there would be a new DCI, DDCI, and DDP.

 

I agree that his absence contributed to the failure in that he was unreachable. However, as I said, I don't give him the benefit of the doubt by asserting he was merely seeking an alibi. Still, the "seeking an alibi" was certainly his "cover-story" when later confronted as to why he was incommunicado. It was a "cover story" that JFK did not accept. I also agree that the BOP was designed to fail, but I believe that Dulles was one of those desiring it to fail unless JFK could be compromised into using direct US military might. 

 

Now we're getting down to a disagreement about why the mission was designed to fail.

 

Had JFK done that the "other" goal of this Intel Op would now be apparent. Primary goal: Remove Castro. Secondary goal: Compromise the Executive Branch. Third goal: Condition JFK to go along with the old boys network. Fourth goal: Move on to South East Asia (where Harriman wanted to focus in the first place). Your "leap" that asserts the BOP failure was designed to remove Dulles, et al, ignores the secondary and tertiary goals inherent to all covert intelligence ops.

 

Lovett was the heavy of the piece.  He was the one with the motive, means and opportunity to sabotage the CIA career of one Allen Dulles.

 

That statement begs the question. We are discussing the merits of whether or not the purpose of deliberately failing the Bay of Pigs was to get rid of Dulles. You are assuming (above) that Dulles was the main objective and then identifying Lovett as the one with the motive, means and opportunity to pull it off. It is a circular argument and therefore fallacious.

 

How could Dulles sit still and let someone [Rusk] obviously antagonistic assume the Highest Authority?

 
Because Rusk and Dulles were on the same page. Neither wanted it to succeed, but for different reasons. Dulles had a "fall back" position. Put another way, if Dulles was available he probably wouldn't have needed to consult with the President. He would never have misjudged the pre-dawn airstrikes to be anything less than crucial to success. And if he pretended not to know their importance, nobody would have believed him in the aftermath. So had he been available he would have either told Bundy to piss up a rope or he would have personally called the President. That assumes he wanted the mission to succeed. But he didn't want it to succeed (unless the success compromised JFK). So by not being available, Dulles circumvents the hot seat by leaving it to Rusk. And Dean Rusk was better positioned to weather that storm (the aftermath) than Dulles by appearing too ignorant to have known how important the airstrikes were to success. After all, Rusk was not of a military mind nor of an intelligence mind.
 
Joe Kennedy and Robert Lovett wanted Dulles gone.

 

From the Center for the Study of Intelligence Newsletter Spring 1995 Issue No. 3

The Elusive ``Bruce-Lovett Report''

 
(Among those signing this statement was another board member, Joseph P. Kennedy. "I know that outfit," the ambassador said after the Bay of Pigs, "and I wouldn't pay them a hundred bucks a week. It's a lucky thing they were found out early.")
 
This quote from Joe Kennedy came AFTER the Bay of Pigs. It does not prove that he wanted Dulles out before the Bay of Pigs,
 
He signed off on the Board of Consultants scathing critique of Dulles.  He was on the same board as Lovett and held the same convictions.
 
Did you read the link I cited?
 
There was widespread dis-satisfaction with Dulles within the Eisenhower Administration.  A lot of folks the State Department wanted him out.
 
and it is certainly ludicrous to suggest that Joe would compromise his own son's authority in a plot to get rid of Dulles by conspiring with Lovett to sabotage the Bay of Pigs!
 
Not if Joe viewed Dulles as a bigger problem than the passing embarrassment his son suffered from the BOP.

 

When a person pushes me to the point of needing to read my own rules of engagement so as not to violate them...'nuff said. Now I know why I created the WAR ROOM.


_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#45 Charles Drago

Charles Drago

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,116 posts
  • LocationWherever I am observed by myself.

Posted 22 February 2015 - 07:05 PM

This phenomenon, Greg, is experienced every so often in our public work: the appearance of an impenetrably dense consciousness.

 

George Carlin felt our pain and summed it up with consummate focus:

 

"Try explaining Hitler to a kid."

 

Look at it another way: You're McMurphy, he's Martini.

 

Call the game, Greg.  For the love of God, call the game.  It's medication time.

 


  • Greg Burnham and Jim Hackett II like this
"[Y]ou can't blame the innocent, they are always guiltless. All you can do is control them or eliminate them. Innocence is a kind of insanity." -- Graham Greene, The Quiet American

"If an individual, through either his own volition or events over which he had no control, found himself taking up residence in a country undefined by flags or physical borders, he could be assured of one immediate and abiding consequence. He was on his own, and solitude and loneliness would probably be his companions unto the grave." -- James Lee Burke, Rain Gods

a wind has blown the rain away and blown
the sky away and all the leaves away,
and the trees stand. i think i too have known
autumn too long
-- e. e. cummings

#46 Jim Hackett II

Jim Hackett II

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 928 posts

Posted 23 February 2015 - 02:31 AM

A clip of one of my favorite films!

 

Both heartbreaking and uplifting through the pain.

A rare thing to accomplish so well in cinema.

 

"Ah, Juicy Fruit".

"Well I'll be damned Chief!"....

 

Jim

Thank You Very Kindly Charles.



#47 Phil Dragoo

Phil Dragoo

    Founding Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 585 posts

Posted 23 February 2015 - 05:06 AM

Allen Dulles went to President Eisenhower for more air in the Guatemalan operation, and Eisenhower granted it.  Things once begun should be finished, he explained.

 

Allen Dulles absented himself as the crisis neared.  Stevenson was embarrassed.  Rusk blocked.  Bundy inserted himself.  The Taylor Report deemed it the primary cause of failure.

 

What was the primary outcome?

 

My neighbor across the street Johnny the son of a WW II Army soldier cursed Kennedy as a traitor.

 

Along with the Brigade and its intelligence handlers and the larger intelligence-military community.

 

In the year of the Berlin Wall, before the "missile crisis" trap which failed to ignite a war in which the eroding advantage could be applied.

 

The comet Dulles returned in the year of the American University speech, the test ban, the Khrushchev correspondence, the Castro covert conferring, the EO 11110 move on the Fed, the NSAM 263 withdrawal from the last, best hope for war.

 

The Dulles-Hunt collaboration reached fruition.  The dismissed Director proves the prime mover behind the Commission covering up the conspiracy/crossfire/coup d'etat.

 

Dulles was called upon increasingly to appear on television debates on the host of conspiracy theories that challenged the Warren Commission hearings. He joked in private that the conspiracy buffs would have had a field day if they had known of a number of strange coincidences--- that he had actually been in Dallas three weeks before the murder (on a book tour to promote The Craft of Intelligence); that one of Mary Bancroft's childhood friends had turned out to be a landlady for Marina Oswald, the assassin's Russian-born wife; and that the landlady was a well-known leftist with distant ties to the family of Alger Hiss.....  James Srodes, pages 554-555 Allen Dulles: Master of Spies - Regnery Publishing Co. - 1999

 

LBJ would appoint Helms director in 1966.  Helms would apply McCord to the Sturgis-Hunt Watergate removal of Nixon.

 

Ford continued obsequious service, naming Nelson Rockefeller (from billing in Thy Will Be Done) to whitewash the beloved Agency, and GHWBush to apply the same sympathy for DeMohrenschildt to the other witnesses.

 

The only sin amongst the liars' club (Angleton's view) was talking out of school, for which Colby took a canoe across the Styx.

 



#48 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,070 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 23 February 2015 - 10:53 AM

While I resist the urge to take pot shots at members of "other forums" for many reasons--especially because those persons are not here to defend themselves--I will allude to one for a specific reason. There is one poster on the EF,  who shall remain nameless, who has made up his mind that General Edwin Walker is the mastermind behind the JFK assassination. He builds "arguments" (if we are generous enough with that term to allow it to be used in the context of his assertions) in support of his conclusion oftentimes with total disregard for logic. Or better yet, he employs logic impeccably when presenting inculpatory evidence, but conveniently disregards it when faced with exculpatory evidence. In other words, he fails to allow the evidence to instruct his judgement. Instead, he commits a logical fallacy known as Special Pleading, in which he cherry picks the evidence that supports his predetermined conclusion and ignores the evidence that refutes it no matter the strength of that evidence.

 

I do not generally criticize the manner in which others conduct the moderation of their forum. After all, it is their ship to sail not mine. So this post should not be construed as a criticism of the EF because that is not my intent.

 

The question becomes: If that person attempted to join this forum would I allow it given their past track record? The answer is, Yes. With a caveat. He would be on a very short leash--by his standards. But that leash would, in reality, be no shorter than any other member's leash--by our standards.

 

Cliff, it is perfectly acceptable to approach a subject with a bias--a leaning--toward a conclusion. It is not acceptable, however, to abandon the rule of critical thinking in order to promote it to the exclusion of the truth. Insomuch as any member insists upon traveling such a course he or she runs the risk of becoming irrelevant to what we do here. I will not allow this forum to sink into irrelevancy in order to serve a whim.

 

This forum was built to specifications instructed by--what I hope is--a higher standard than that. It is my job to make sure that standard is maintained.

 

This game has been called.


_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#49 Guest_Darren Hastings_*

Guest_Darren Hastings_*
  • Guests

Posted 23 February 2015 - 03:46 PM

I've been a member of EF for a while and a reader for a long time but haven't ever posted there - I prefer to post here for a variety of reasons.

I've been following the Proof of motorcade stopping thread and its many changes in direction....and have enjoyed the discourse. Regardless of my beliefs I do enjoy some of the theories that are proffered and argued over there. I find value in learning and ultimately discounting what I don't agree with.

#50 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,070 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 23 February 2015 - 06:53 PM

Dulles was not schizophrenic. He was brilliant. And evil. He had all contingencies covered...except for the one that factored in a President who would stand up to him. It was among his biggest miscues.


  • Jim Hackett II likes this

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#51 Charles Drago

Charles Drago

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,116 posts
  • LocationWherever I am observed by myself.

Posted 24 February 2015 - 11:36 AM

Post-Missile Crisis preservation of Castro is the lemonade squeezed by the growers from the B.O.P. lemon.


  • Jim Hackett II likes this
"[Y]ou can't blame the innocent, they are always guiltless. All you can do is control them or eliminate them. Innocence is a kind of insanity." -- Graham Greene, The Quiet American

"If an individual, through either his own volition or events over which he had no control, found himself taking up residence in a country undefined by flags or physical borders, he could be assured of one immediate and abiding consequence. He was on his own, and solitude and loneliness would probably be his companions unto the grave." -- James Lee Burke, Rain Gods

a wind has blown the rain away and blown
the sky away and all the leaves away,
and the trees stand. i think i too have known
autumn too long
-- e. e. cummings

#52 Charles Drago

Charles Drago

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,116 posts
  • LocationWherever I am observed by myself.

Posted 24 February 2015 - 11:41 AM

Greg: I think you're checking the right post -- 

 


  • Jim Hackett II likes this
"[Y]ou can't blame the innocent, they are always guiltless. All you can do is control them or eliminate them. Innocence is a kind of insanity." -- Graham Greene, The Quiet American

"If an individual, through either his own volition or events over which he had no control, found himself taking up residence in a country undefined by flags or physical borders, he could be assured of one immediate and abiding consequence. He was on his own, and solitude and loneliness would probably be his companions unto the grave." -- James Lee Burke, Rain Gods

a wind has blown the rain away and blown
the sky away and all the leaves away,
and the trees stand. i think i too have known
autumn too long
-- e. e. cummings

#53 Guest_Darren Hastings_*

Guest_Darren Hastings_*
  • Guests

Posted 24 February 2015 - 11:49 AM

Off topic.....apologies.....but it humoured me.

http://www.schnitz.com.au/

#54 Jim Hackett II

Jim Hackett II

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 928 posts

Posted 24 February 2015 - 02:58 PM

Dulles excelled at evil and has no visible excuse of instability of mind.

 

Both brothers were quite adept and crafty and banal.

 

Twisted to evil but quite "in control" of self.

 

The dark heart is not "insane" but chose exploitation and vile acts at cost to others, not a psychotic only vile.

 

His history of press manipulation and various public deeds prove his capacity for the delusion of others,

 

little wonder James Angleton and he worked effectively in partnership of fascism.

 

I am still anxiously awaiting Mr. David Talbot's book.

 

Jim



#55 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,070 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 24 February 2015 - 03:53 PM

Charles,

 

Thanks for the comic relief. I should've taken the time to enjoy it sooner, but I was busy putting salt in my paper cuts.


_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#56 Phil Dragoo

Phil Dragoo

    Founding Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 585 posts

Posted 24 February 2015 - 04:04 PM

The schizophrenia lies not in Dulles, unless by that is meant that dark operation underlying the overt referred to by John Newman:

 

When he recently indicated the Kennedy assassination plot rode in the shadow of the Get-Castro operation

 

Would we agree this "Get-Castro" Elmore Leonard pulp was as authentic as the Chicago plot

 

a construction of flats lowered into place in that November of whisperings on the wind

 

In Stephen Kinzer, The Brothers, we see them, raised by a family of secretaries of state

 

interning at Versailles to create the German petri dish, later adding nutrients, praising Goebbels

 

When the trap was sprung, Donovan sent Allen to Switzerland ('43) where he amassed caches of sniper rifles and silencers

 

twenty years before Dallas

 

David Talbot, The Devil's Chessboard, will be out October 15, 2015, wherein he promises to explore

 

Dulles' continuing contacts with Angleton, Helms and Hunt

 

Hunt, whom he summoned that November ('61) when Mongoose was the zoo favorite and retirement and a memoir seemed apt

 

Was there an Angleton memo citing Hunt in Dallas, as Lane would deconstruct the Chinese grocers alibi

 

Was Trento accurate and truthful:

 

Fundamentally, the founding fathers of US intelligence were liars.

Outside of their duplicity, the only thing they had in common was the desire for absolute power.

I did things that, in looking back on my life, I regret.

But I was part of it and I loved being in it.

Allen Dulles, Richard Helms, Carmel Office, and Frank Wisner were the grand masters.

If you were in a room with them you were in a room full of people that you had to believe would deservedly end up in hell.

I guess I will see them there soon.

 

2enc86e.jpg



#57 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,070 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 25 February 2015 - 11:00 AM

Cliff,

 

The circularity of your argumentation is nearly complete. I must hold each of those who participate here to the same high standard else this forum will be relegated to the theater of the absurd. I have done my very best to point out to you the futility of your obfuscatory fictive constructs while keeping it civil. That does not seem to penetrate the mind of the terminally recalcitrant. In the final analysis, your inability to grasp your own fallacies is not my responsibility.

 

The last time you left this forum you claimed it was because you "refused to be censored."

 

You might want to leave again.


_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#58 Phil Dragoo

Phil Dragoo

    Founding Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 585 posts

Posted 26 February 2015 - 04:59 AM

Stephen Kinzer, The Brothers, page 172:

 

Bombing raids by CIA planes were having their desired effect in Guatemala.  They symbolized Washington's determination to depose Arbenz, and because of their supposed effect on him and his supporters, they became popularly known as sulfatos--laxatives.  Then, within a matter of hours on June 21-22, the sulfato force was decimated.  One plane was disabled by ground fire, another crash-landed, and two more were forced down in Mexico after bombing a border town.  Only a couple remained--not enough to maintain the operation's momentum.

 

"Air power could be decisive," Allen's men on the scene told him in an urgent cable on June 23.

 

Within hours, Allen was in the Oval Office.  He explained the situation and asked Eisenhower to authorize immediate deployment of several air force planes to Nicaragua, where the dictator, Anastasio Somoza, would release them for use in PB/Success.  When he was finished, Henry Holland, the State Department's legal adviser, presented the contrary case, arguing that further bombing would violate international law and promote anti-Americanism.  Eisenhower decided in Allen's favor, and the planes were deployed.  Later he told one of his close military comrades, General Andrew Goodpaster, that it was an easy choice.

 

"If you at any time take the route of violence or support of violence," he said, "then you commit yourself to carry it through, and it's too late to have second thoughts."

 

Phil's footnote:  Per Greg's research and presentations JFK's intent was clear, to destroy Castro's planes on the ground before the raid.

 

He was not consulted when the raid was blocked by Rusk and Bundy--until it was too late--yet he was blamed:

 

E. Howard Hunt, Give Us This Day, 1973, made a great melodramatic claim of betrayal--and in the same year Gore Vidal would address The Art and Arts of E. Howard Hunt.  And of course Hunt admitted to congress he forged cables to blame JFK for the murders of Diem and Nhu.

 

I recall a reaction of violent anger, charges of "traitor" served in a bed of expletives.

 

At that dark hour of failure, of death and capture, a small army of would-be assassins was formed composed of Brigade veterans and their handlers from intelligence and the military.

 

Dulles well knew the power of psychological warfare--Lansdale was a master practicioner and may have appeared for Dulles' second publication in 1963,

 

Bundy the Dulles man blocking the vital final raid, insuring defeat.

 

Operating in the interests of the Director of Central Intelligence rather than the president and commander-in-chief.

 

Obedience to the liar's club.

 

00angleton6.jpg

 

 







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: JFK Assassination, JFK, Assassination

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Web Work by: XmasZen.com