16-03-2013, 12:21 PM
Question:
How were the most powerful people in and around government who, innocent of any involvement in the conspiracy, were told and accepted as being true what today we call the Phase I story, mollified when they asked (and I believe many of them did), "If we go along with this cover-up of Cuban and Soviet complicity for the greater good, how and when will the guilty Cuban and Soviet parties be punished?"
Answer:
I posit no one was under the impression Kennedy was killed by Castro or Khrushchev, hence no one asked when either or both Communist voodoo dolls would be punished.
How does one survive in a bureaucracy such as the Beltway. What is the source of power. How is it recognized and respected.
The men closest to Kennedy did not raise any objection. We know now from Tip O'Neill's Man of the House that Kenny O'Donnell and Dave Powers thought the shots came from the front but gave the Commission what the FBI told them to. That Robert and Jackie sent word to Khrushchev they didn't suspect him.
What would be the mindset of a Lodge, a Rusk, a MacNamara, either Bundy, Acheson--they would have known in an instant.
The generals who so opposed JFK were having their best day, resisting fist-pumping and ribald toasts.
The weeping and gnashing of teeth was for black churches and perhaps even the Republicans described by our late friend at the Boston financial house.
But those were downstream from the seat of power.
In the street for the Nixon Counterinnaugural January 1969 as a Rudd Maoist banged the knocker on the steel door of Justice the shirt-sleeved lawyers on the second floor grinned like idiots and shot the bird.
A deep cynicism informed by instinct dispelled any notion of foreign intrigue.
A dose of logic would finish off the notion of a Russian plot. Johnson would not be giving any "we are all mortal" speeches.
Why would the Russians empower a Texan who was going to teach Ho a lesson?
Certainly none of the Southern three (Boggs, Russell, or Cooper bought a Boris & Natasha cartoon) while Warren wet himself running from Ruby's cell.
I think the act put the fear beyond the fear of God into everyone.
Hence they could take that awkward clause from the draft version of NSAM 273 signed the day after they stabled the riderless horse.
I think the event put the fear of a Stephen King clown into these people whose only previous concern was petty office politics.
For the insiders who knew of an Oswald-like substance dragged through the Cuban and Soviet consulates in DF, CIA was a hot topic.
October 2, 1963, the Washington Daily News wrote, "If the United States ever experiences a `Seven Days in May' it will come from the CIA".
And the following day, in the New York Times (from wikipedia):
An article concerning Kennedy's relationship with the CIA was written by journalist Arthur Krock, and published in the New York Times on 3 October 1963. The article, entitled "The Intra-Administration War in Vietnam", quotes a high-ranking official in the government as saying "[t]he CIA's growth was likened to a malignancy" which this "very high official was not even sure the White House could control ... any longer. If the United States ever experiences [an attempt at a coup to overthrow the government] it will come from the CIA and not the Pentagon." The "agency represents a tremendous power and total unaccountability to anyone."
Would Washington insiders suspect first foreign Communists or domestic enemies of the peacemongerer withdrawing advisors from Vietnam?
Now, Buckley accosts Lane in the December 1, 1966, Firing Line program--Buckley throws around the term Communist like a big fish he's landed on his boat, but then admits, "I don't care who killed John Kennedy."
And that, I am certain, was the takeaway of every opponent of the dead president, while his supporters were chilled into silence, knowing the killers were in the woods around them.
Compared to CIA, they're all just Bambi.
How were the most powerful people in and around government who, innocent of any involvement in the conspiracy, were told and accepted as being true what today we call the Phase I story, mollified when they asked (and I believe many of them did), "If we go along with this cover-up of Cuban and Soviet complicity for the greater good, how and when will the guilty Cuban and Soviet parties be punished?"
Answer:
I posit no one was under the impression Kennedy was killed by Castro or Khrushchev, hence no one asked when either or both Communist voodoo dolls would be punished.
How does one survive in a bureaucracy such as the Beltway. What is the source of power. How is it recognized and respected.
The men closest to Kennedy did not raise any objection. We know now from Tip O'Neill's Man of the House that Kenny O'Donnell and Dave Powers thought the shots came from the front but gave the Commission what the FBI told them to. That Robert and Jackie sent word to Khrushchev they didn't suspect him.
What would be the mindset of a Lodge, a Rusk, a MacNamara, either Bundy, Acheson--they would have known in an instant.
The generals who so opposed JFK were having their best day, resisting fist-pumping and ribald toasts.
The weeping and gnashing of teeth was for black churches and perhaps even the Republicans described by our late friend at the Boston financial house.
But those were downstream from the seat of power.
In the street for the Nixon Counterinnaugural January 1969 as a Rudd Maoist banged the knocker on the steel door of Justice the shirt-sleeved lawyers on the second floor grinned like idiots and shot the bird.
A deep cynicism informed by instinct dispelled any notion of foreign intrigue.
A dose of logic would finish off the notion of a Russian plot. Johnson would not be giving any "we are all mortal" speeches.
Why would the Russians empower a Texan who was going to teach Ho a lesson?
Certainly none of the Southern three (Boggs, Russell, or Cooper bought a Boris & Natasha cartoon) while Warren wet himself running from Ruby's cell.
I think the act put the fear beyond the fear of God into everyone.
Hence they could take that awkward clause from the draft version of NSAM 273 signed the day after they stabled the riderless horse.
I think the event put the fear of a Stephen King clown into these people whose only previous concern was petty office politics.
For the insiders who knew of an Oswald-like substance dragged through the Cuban and Soviet consulates in DF, CIA was a hot topic.
October 2, 1963, the Washington Daily News wrote, "If the United States ever experiences a `Seven Days in May' it will come from the CIA".
And the following day, in the New York Times (from wikipedia):
An article concerning Kennedy's relationship with the CIA was written by journalist Arthur Krock, and published in the New York Times on 3 October 1963. The article, entitled "The Intra-Administration War in Vietnam", quotes a high-ranking official in the government as saying "[t]he CIA's growth was likened to a malignancy" which this "very high official was not even sure the White House could control ... any longer. If the United States ever experiences [an attempt at a coup to overthrow the government] it will come from the CIA and not the Pentagon." The "agency represents a tremendous power and total unaccountability to anyone."
Would Washington insiders suspect first foreign Communists or domestic enemies of the peacemongerer withdrawing advisors from Vietnam?
Now, Buckley accosts Lane in the December 1, 1966, Firing Line program--Buckley throws around the term Communist like a big fish he's landed on his boat, but then admits, "I don't care who killed John Kennedy."
And that, I am certain, was the takeaway of every opponent of the dead president, while his supporters were chilled into silence, knowing the killers were in the woods around them.
Compared to CIA, they're all just Bambi.