+- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora)
+-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: JFK Assassination (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-3.html)
+--- Thread: On Edwin Kaiser and Related Topics (/thread-12526.html)
On Edwin Kaiser and Related Topics - Jim DiEugenio - 21-08-2016
CV: The principals should have known better than to have let the invasion go forward.
The top level of the CIA took the fall, but Rusk, Bundy and Kennedy himself should have known better than to proceed.
The claim Jim DiEugenio and many others make that the CIA and the military tried to pressure JFK into saving the operation with US military force on D-Day is bullshit.
So what if Dulles claimed otherwise well after the fact?
The guy was a professional liar.
So what if JFK made the same claim?
The guy was a professional politician, and the claim is self-serving.
The kind of logic used above and the rules of evidence employed seem to me to be reminiscent of the likes of David Von Pein. Von Pein works from a previously arrived at position and everything else gets consumed by that position.
Well Varnell does the same with his theory of Zapata.
For anyone to write that the CIA and military did not try and get JFK to save the operation by committing American forces or launching an air attack from Nicaragua, that is just utter and complete BS. That is what happened, and it happened more than once. And JFK turned it down.
And the idea that Dulles would lie to himself about this is more complete crap. Because all we have are his notes. Which no one was supposed to see. So who was he deceiving?
Kennedy lied about this to Paul Fay in a private conversation? Which would never have been known about if he had not been murdered?
If Kennedy did not feel he had been betrayed and lied to about the Bay of Pigs, then why did he commission the Taylor Report? Why did they call all of those witnesses? Why did RFK question Dulles so aggressively? Why did Bobby then search for the Bruce/Lovett Report? Why did he read the Kirkpatrick Report? Why did JFK issue the three NSAMs 55, 56, 57? Why did Kennedy then issue orders about the American ambassador's prominence over the CIA station chief in foreign countries? Why did he then consult with Schlesinger about changing the name of the CIA? Why did he then install his brother as ombudsman over Mongoose?
To any objective person with any respect for evidence and logic its because he felt he had been suckered and wanted to get more control of the Agency.
The worst thing about a half baked theorist is not that they end up being solipsistic. But they end up doing such for no discernible reason than that--to advance their own theories.
And then they cannot figure out why they are ignored.
On Edwin Kaiser and Related Topics - Cliff Varnell - 21-08-2016
My comments in red
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:CV: The principals should have known better than to have let the invasion go forward.
The top level of the CIA took the fall, but Rusk, Bundy and Kennedy himself should have known better than to proceed.
The claim Jim DiEugenio and many others make that the CIA and the military tried to pressure JFK into saving the operation with US military force on D-Day is bullshit.
So what if Dulles claimed otherwise well after the fact?
The guy was a professional liar.
So what if JFK made the same claim?
The guy was a professional politician, and the claim is self-serving.
The kind of logic used above and the rules of evidence employed seem to me to be reminiscent of the likes of David Von Pein.
The King of the Contentless Dismissal is back!
Von Pein works from a previously arrived at position and everything else gets consumed by that position.
Irony lives!
Well Varnell does the same with his theory of Zapata.
Not a theory.
It's right there in the mid-March memos you conveniently ignore: "it was decided," consensus amongst the principals that there would be no US military intervention.
What part of that escapes you?
For anyone to write that the CIA and military did not try and get JFK to save the operation by committing American forces or launching an air attack from Nicaragua, that is just utter and complete BS.
Face saving measures - weak and ridiculous. There was no real effort to pressure JFK beyond that.
That is what happened, and it happened more than once.
Yes, Cabell called Rusk at 4am on D-Day and begged to talk to JFK, and Rusk put him thru.
Kennedy turned him down because the official policy of non-intervention was in effect.
Everyone knew it.
And JFK turned it down.
It was turned down a month earlier in a group decision that wasn't going to be overturned by weak last minute pleas.
And the idea that Dulles would lie to himself about this is more complete crap. Because all we have are his notes. Which no one was supposed to see.
Sure about that?
Weren't those notes part of a publishing project?
So who was he deceiving?
Anyone who might read his notes.
Kennedy lied about this to Paul Fay in a private conversation? Which would never have been known about if he had not been murdered?
Standard politician puffery.
If Kennedy did not feel he had been betrayed and lied to about the Bay of Pigs, then why did he commission the Taylor Report?
To get rid of Dulles, the purpose of the operation, probably, once Rusk took over at State and started bitching about it.
Why did they call all of those witnesses?
To remove Dulles, Cabell and Bissell in order to put Richard Helms in charge of clandestine ops.
Why did RFK question Dulles so aggressively?
He wanted to get rid of him.
Why did Bobby then search for the Bruce/Lovett Report?
To get more info from the guys who wanted to get rid of Dulles.
Why did he read the Kirkpatrick Report?
Lyman Kirkpatrick wanted Bissell's job, a perfect alignment of ambition with the Kennedys and the CIA guys vying to move up.
Sadly for old Lyman, Helms got the Deputy Director for Plans gig, instead.
Why did JFK issue the three NSAMs 55, 56, 57? Why did Kennedy then issue orders about the American ambassador's prominence over the CIA station chief in foreign countries? Why did he then consult with Schlesinger about changing the name of the CIA? Why did he then install his brother as ombudsman over Mongoose?
He didn't trust the CIA.
No one is challenging that.
To any objective person with any respect for evidence and logic its because he felt he had been suckered and wanted to get more control of the Agency.
No shit, Sherlock.
No one is challenging that.
The worst thing about a half baked theorist is not that they end up being solipsistic.
Pure projection.
But they end up doing such for no discernible reason than that--to advance their own theories.
Uh hunh, Jim D. Sure thang...
And then they cannot figure out why they are ignored.
Excuse me?
Ignored by those for whom I hold a barely concealed contempt?
Sure thang, Jim...
On Edwin Kaiser and Related Topics - Jim DiEugenio - 21-08-2016
Varnell does not want to admit he is wrong so he wants to play ping pong.
Which is another waste of everyone's time.
I love his excuse for Dulles' notes.
Dulles abandoned the project for that precise reason. He didn't want to expose his Machiavellian agenda in public. If you recall, while putting together his notes, he exploded in rage with "That Kennedy, he thought he was a God!" He then decided not to proceed anymore. All in the Douglass book, which Cliff evidently shares the distinction with Scott of not having read.
BTW, to go a step further as to this Varnellian nonsense, those notes were not found for TWENTY YEARS!
So the Varnellian absurdity of Dulles having left them for someone to find is more complete nuttiness.
On Edwin Kaiser and Related Topics - Scott Kaiser - 21-08-2016
As I've said, I'm always wrong, therefore it makes no sense for me to try and convince anyone, people should always believe what they want and not what someone is trying to Ram down their throat, as I've said before which can be proven. Bundy called the CIA and cancelled the air strikes, Kennedy informed Bundy to do so. Kennedy was president who allowed himself to be manipulated by Bundy and Rusk who cleverly sabotaged the mission. game over!
On Edwin Kaiser and Related Topics - Cliff Varnell - 21-08-2016
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:Varnell does not want to admit he is wrong so he wants to play ping pong.
Which is another waste of everyone's time.
I love his excuse for Dulles' notes.
Dulles abandoned the project for that precise reason.
So now you acknowledge that the notes were written for a publishing project?
Nice dance step, Jim.
He didn't want to expose his Machiavellian agenda in public.
So high tailing it to Puerto Rico D-Day-1 was a Machiavellian way to force Kennedy to countermand agreed-upon, well-established US policy?
He was going to bring pressure to bear upon Kennedy by taking himself out of the loop entirely?
The Prince rolls in his grave...
If you recall, while putting together his notes, he exploded in rage with "That Kennedy, he thought he was a God!" He then decided not to proceed anymore.
It's nice of you to acknowledge that the notes were initially prepared to be read.
All in the Douglass book, which Cliff evidently shares the distinction with Scott of not having read.
I called you on your mistake; I got that part about the publishing project correct.
It's one thing to read something as you do, Jim, it's another thing to read with comprehension.
You cannot read the Bundy memo with comprehension, evidently.
BTW, to go a step further as to this Varnellian nonsense, those notes were not found for TWENTY YEARS!
So the Varnellian absurdity of Dulles having left them for someone to find is more complete nuttiness.
Jim DiEugenio won't be able to process the following, gentle reader, suffering as he does with Allen Dulles Derangement Syndrome.
The added emphasis in the text below is the part that goes over Jim's head.
http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2013/11/jfk-bay-of-pigs-allendulles.html
<quote on>
How the worst blot on JFK's presidency happened
Was Allen Dulles' early dementia to blame for the Bay of Pigs?
November 23, 2013 6:00AM ET
by Stephen Kinzer
Before dawn on April 17, 1961, a CIA-trained force of Cuban exiles landed in Cuba at the Bay of Pigs in an attempt to overthrow Fidel Castro's new regime. History has recorded the disaster that befell them. "How could I have been so stupid?" President John F. Kennedy shouted after the scope of the failure became clear.
Soon afterward, Kennedy fired his CIA director, Allen Dulles. "In a parliamentary system of government, it is I who would be leaving office," he told Dulles. "But under our system, it is you who must go."
Historians often call the Bay of Pigs failure the worst moment of Kennedy's presidency. Historian Michael Beschloss has called it Kennedy's "first enormous defeat" and said Kennedy felt he had "blotted his copy book forever." What has not been understood, however, is that this failure may have been in part the result of dementia that was beginning to affect Dulles.
Listening to baseball
Planning for the Bay of Pigs invasion began under President Dwight Eisenhower. As soon as Dulles was given the assignment, he did something he had never done before in his eight years as CIA director: He turned over a vital assignment to another officer and stopped paying attention to it.
The person Dulles chose, Richard Bissell, did almost all the talking every time the two of them went to the White House to brief Eisenhower on the plot. When Bissell briefed the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Dulles did not even attend.
Stories of Dulles' increasingly distracted behavior had already begun to circulate quietly at the CIA. One day in 1958, an analyst took him a batch of surveillance photos taken by a U-2 reconnaissance plane but found him unwilling to switch off the baseball game he was listening to. He paid little attention to the photos and remained absorbed in the game, muttering comments like, "He couldn't hit a bull in the ass with a banjo." With the same extreme inattention, he absented himself from planning for the Bay of Pigs.
In the weeks before the invasion, secrecy was broken by reporters from Time, The New York Times and other news outlets. The landing spot was changed to a beach, from which the invaders would have no chance to reach mountain hideouts. Kennedy, eager to limit U.S. involvement in the plot, made clear that he would allow only eight planes to provide air cover not enough to knock out Castro's air force and would under no circumstances order U.S. Air Force planes to support them.
These changes convinced the two men Bissell had chosen to direct the invasion CIA officer Jacob Esterline and Col. Jack Hawkins of the Marine Corps to conclude that it would fail. On Sunday morning, April 9, they went to Bissell's home, evidently distraught, and told him the plot was certain to end in "terrible disaster." He told them it was too far advanced to be called off and persuaded them to go back to work.
Under other circumstances, these two men might have appealed to Dulles himself. They did not because they understood that Dulles did not know much about the plan, had delegated everything to Bissell and would have nothing to say.
On the day of the invasion, Dulles was not even in Washington. Instead he was in San Juan, Puerto Rico, joining Margaret Mead and Dr. Benjamin Spock as speakers at a convention of young businessmen. He returned late at night.
"Well, how is it going?" he asked the aide who met his plane in Baltimore. "Not very well, sir," the aide said. Dulles' only reply was, "Oh, is that so?"
The two men chatted on the ride to Dulles' home in Georgetown. After they arrived, Dulles invited his aide in for a drink. Over whiskey, he shifted the subject away from Cuba and began rambling aimlessly. The aide later described this conversation as "unreal."
Sobering lessons
After the invasion failed, Dulles fell into a period of shock. ThenAttorney General Robert Kennedy later wrote that he "looked like living death" and "was always putting his head in his hands." John Kennedy dismissed him a few months later.
The declassified transcript of a closed hearing that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee held two weeks after the invasion shows that some of Kennedy's advisers attributed the fiasco to Dulles' dreamy absentmindedness. "He showed up at meetings and sat there smoking his pipe," said Admiral Arleigh Burke, chief of naval operations. "I blame him for not being there."
Years later, in an oral history now available at the Dulles family archives at Princeton University, another witness to the disaster, William Bundy, made a similar judgment.
"I had the feeling that by then, he was slowing down a bit," said Bundy, who at that time worked under Paul Nitze, Assistant Secretary of State for International Security Affairs. "He hadn't been quite the man I had known. All through, he hadn't been as much on top of the operation as I expected."
Several years after his forced retirement, Dulles wrote rambling notes for an essay defending his performance, but his sister, Eleanor Dulles, persuaded him not to publish it because "he had already begun to lose his command over his memory and ideas." In retirement, he began losing his way on the streets of Georgetown.
"Perhaps it was what we call Alzheimer's disease today," a cousin, Eleanor Elliot, who cared for him later suggested. She recognized what no one at the White House or CIA had seen or dared to mention in the weeks leading up to the Bay of Pigs invasion.
When Allen Dulles died in 1969, obituaries focused on his responsibility for what one called "the greatest U.S. intelligence blunder." His appalling performance may be explained at least in part by the onset of dementia. It taught Kennedy what he called "sobering lessons," but it remains the low point of his presidency.
<quote off>
Allen Dulles may have been goofy but Dean Rusk and McGeorge Bundy knew what they were doing.
Kennedy was more betrayed by those guys than the lyin' CIA.
On Edwin Kaiser and Related Topics - Cliff Varnell - 21-08-2016
Scott Kaiser Wrote:As I've said, I'm always wrong, therefore it makes no sense for me to try and convince anyone, people should always believe what they want and not what someone is trying to Ram down their throat, as I've said before which can be proven. Bundy called the CIA and cancelled the air strikes, Kennedy informed Bundy to do so. Kennedy was president who allowed himself to be manipulated by Bundy and Rusk who cleverly sabotaged the mission. game over!
Scott, there were no air strikes to cancel D-Day-1.
The Bundy Plan made it clear Castro's air force had to be knocked out D-Day-2.
If Kennedy had been on top of the situation, he would have looked at the D-Day-1 recon photos, seen the intact planes, and called off the operation.
He relied on the CIA, Rusk and Bundy and they all screwed him over.
Doesn't absolve Kennedy: after less than 3 months on the job, the young President was in over his head.
On Edwin Kaiser and Related Topics - Scott Kaiser - 22-08-2016
I'm talking about the actual air cover the A-4s were to provide the B-26s, according to some of the members of the Bay of Pigs that cover wasn't suppose to happen the call came in late the planes had already taken off but arrived an hour late due to the screw up in time.
On Edwin Kaiser and Related Topics - Scott Kaiser - 22-08-2016
When kennedy found out that A4s were being used for aircover he wanted to avoid US involvment, but it was to late.
On Edwin Kaiser and Related Topics - Scott Kaiser - 22-08-2016
Now we have an idea why they were sworn to secrecy.
On Edwin Kaiser and Related Topics - Tracy Riddle - 22-08-2016
All of this misses the bigger problem - that an invasion of Cuba was doomed to fail because the revolutionary regime was popular with most Cubans, and had a large, combat-experienced army with ideal terrain to defend. It's the reason why JFK didn't want to invade Cuba during the Missile Crisis. As Marine Corps Commandant David Schoup pointed out by displaying a map of Cuba with a small red dot overlaying it. He said that the red dot represented the island of Tarawa, which took three days and 18,000 Marines to capture.