A lot of "talk" about the possibility. No order from JFK. In November, 1961, JFK asked journalist Tad Szulc: ?What would you think if I ordered Castro to be assassinated?? JFK claimed that he was under ?terrible pressure? from his advisers.
But already in 1960 Eisenhower had authorized the assassination of Castro and Richard Nixon had ordered the CIA to do it.
>A lot of "talk" about the possibility. No order from JFK. In November, >1961, JFK asked journalist Tad Szulc: ?What would you think if I ordered >Castro to be assassinated?? JFK claimed that he was under ?terrible >pressure? from his advisers.
>But already in 1960 Eisenhower had authorized the assassination of Castro >and Richard Nixon had ordered the CIA to do it.
Legacy of Ashes: The history of the CIA, Tim Weiner.
In the words of Helms, when asked if JFK wanted Castro dead. “There is nothing
on paper, of course, but there is certainly no question in my mind that he did. Back to plausible denial, Marsh. It would have been very sloppy work if you
could find it on paper. Page 216.
On May 7, 1962, the attorney general (Bobby) was briefed in full on the Rifle
Project by the CIA’s general counsel, Lawrence Houston, and the agency’s
security chief, Sheffield Edwards. RFK was “mad as hell-not mad about the
assassination plot itself, but about the Mafia’s role in it. He did nothing to
stop the CIA from seeking Castro’s death. Page 215.
Johnson still had no idea that the United States had been trying to kill Castro
for the better part of three years. Very few people knew. One was Allen
Dulles. Another was Richard Helms. A third was Bobby Kennedy. A fourth was
very likely Fidel Castro. Page 260.
>> A lot of "talk" about the possibility. No order from JFK. In November,
>> 1961, JFK asked journalist Tad Szulc: ?What would you think if I ordered
>> Castro to be assassinated?? JFK claimed that he was under ?terrible
>> pressure? from his advisers.
>> But already in 1960 Eisenhower had authorized the assassination of Castro
>> and Richard Nixon had ordered the CIA to do it.
> Legacy of Ashes: The history of the CIA, Tim Weiner.
> In the words of Helms, when asked if JFK wanted Castro dead. ?There is nothing
> on paper, of course, but there is certainly no question in my mind that he did.
> Back to plausible denial, Marsh. It would have been very sloppy work if you
> could find it on paper. Page 216.
You know nothing about the world of intelligence. We did find it on paper. We found the CIA memos which outline the operations to assassinate Castro, the Inspector General's Reort, the memo in which the Director of Central Intelligence authorizes the Castro assassination, and more that you never even dreamed of.
> On May 7, 1962, the attorney general (Bobby) was briefed in full on the Rifle
> Project by the CIA?s general counsel, Lawrence Houston, and the agency?s
The Rifle project? You don't even know what you are talking about.
It was called ZR/RIFLE.
> security chief, Sheffield Edwards. RFK was ?mad as hell-not mad about the
> assassination plot itself, but about the Mafia?s role in it. He did nothing to
> stop the CIA from seeking Castro?s death. Page 215.
As usual you omit the important details. RFK only learned about the Castro plots by reading about them in the newspaper. Then he told his brother and JFK ordered him to get to the bottom of it, so Bobby called the CIA and asked them if it was true or not. That is what started it. When Bobby found out he ordered the CIA to stop the operation.
> Johnson still had no idea that the United States had been trying to kill Castro
> for the better part of three years. Very few people knew. One was Allen
> Dulles. Another was Richard Helms. A third was Bobby Kennedy. A fourth was
> very likely Fidel Castro. Page 260.
Hundreds of people knew that the CIA was trying to kill Castro. Anyone who could buy a newspaper would know.
And as always you ignore the fact that the Castro plots started under Eisenhower and the DCI then put his authorization on paper.
>>> A lot of "talk" about the possibility. No order from JFK. In November,
>>> 1961, JFK asked journalist Tad Szulc: ?What would you think if I ordered
>>> Castro to be assassinated?? JFK claimed that he was under ?terrible
>>> pressure? from his advisers.
>>> But already in 1960 Eisenhower had authorized the assassination of Castro
>>> and Richard Nixon had ordered the CIA to do it.
>> Legacy of Ashes: The history of the CIA, Tim Weiner.
>> In the words of Helms, when asked if JFK wanted Castro dead. ?There is >> nothing on paper, of course, but there is certainly no question in my mind >> that he did. Back to plausible denial, Marsh. It would have been very >> sloppy work if you could find it on paper. Page 216.
>You know nothing about the world of intelligence.
That is pretty rich Marsh. One of us carried a Cach Wheel and codes for a year. It wasn't you. One of us attended S-2 (thats intelligence for you) briefings on operations planned based on intelligence they had received.
It wasn't you either. One of us led operations utilizing intelligence.
Again, it wasn't you. All you have is an armchair knowledge of intelligence and most everything else. It would help if you had ever done something in the real world.
>We did find it on paper.We found the CIA memos which outline the operations to >assassinate Castro, the Inspector General's Reort, the memo in which the >Director of Central Intelligence authorizes the Castro assassination, and >more that you never even dreamed of.
Pay attention Marsh. Helms was referring to an order by JFK to assassinate Castro written on paper. Have you found that one?
>> On May 7, 1962, the attorney general (Bobby) was briefed in full on the Rifle
>> Project by the CIA?s general counsel, Lawrence Houston, and the agency?s
>The Rifle project? You don't even know what you are talking about.
>It was called ZR/RIFLE.
The book said "Rifle".
>> security chief, Sheffield Edwards. RFK was ?mad as hell-not mad about the
>>assassination plot itself, but about the Mafia?s role in it. He did nothing to
>> stop the CIA from seeking Castro?s death. Page 215.
>As usual you omit the important details. RFK only learned about the Castro >plots by reading about them in the newspaper.
This is laughable. Always has been and always will be.
Then he told his brother and
>JFK ordered him to get to the bottom of it, so Bobby called the CIA and >asked them if it was true or not. That is what started it. When Bobby >found out he ordered the CIA to stop the operation.
You have this on paper? The book says Bobby did not stop it at all.
>>Johnson still had no idea that the United States had been trying to kill Castro
>> for the better part of three years. Very few people knew. One was Allen
>> Dulles. Another was Richard Helms. A third was Bobby Kennedy. A fourth was
>> very likely Fidel Castro. Page 260.
>Hundreds of people knew that the CIA was trying to kill Castro. Anyone >who could buy a newspaper would know.
>And as always you ignore the fact that the Castro plots started under >Eisenhower and the DCI then put his authorization on paper.
Not at all Marsh. And when Kennedy became president Ike's order remained justification to continue the assassination attempts on Castro. Or at least it was justification in the eyes of the CIA.
Robert Morrow and Mario Garcia Kohly got involved in a counterfeit scheme involving Cuban pesos, in an attempt to destabilize the Cuban economy prior to an invasion that they anticipated would happen in late 1963.
They were both arrested in a Secret Service "sting" operation, along with Morrow's wife and Kohly's right-hand man,in October, 1963. You can read my account "The Morrow-Kohly-Nixon Connection" at http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/morrow2.htm.
Nixon offered to defend Kohly FOR FREE! - Peter R. Whitmey
>>>> A lot of "talk" about the possibility. No order from JFK. In November,
>>>> 1961, JFK asked journalist Tad Szulc: ?What would you think if I ordered
>>>> Castro to be assassinated?? JFK claimed that he was under ?terrible
>>>> pressure? from his advisers.
>>>> But already in 1960 Eisenhower had authorized the assassination of Castro
>>>> and Richard Nixon had ordered the CIA to do it.
>>> Legacy of Ashes: The history of the CIA, Tim Weiner.
>>> In the words of Helms, when asked if JFK wanted Castro dead. ?There is
>>> nothing on paper, of course, but there is certainly no question in my mind
>>> that he did. Back to plausible denial, Marsh. It would have been very
>>> sloppy work if you could find it on paper. Page 216.
>> You know nothing about the world of intelligence.
> That is pretty rich Marsh. One of us carried a Cach Wheel and codes for a
> year. It wasn't you. One of us attended S-2 (thats intelligence for you)
> briefings on operations planned based on intelligence they had received.
> It wasn't you either. One of us led operations utilizing intelligence.
> Again, it wasn't you. All you have is an armchair knowledge of
> intelligence and most everything else. It would help if you had ever done
> something in the real world.
>> We did find it on paper.We found the CIA memos which outline the operations to
>> assassinate Castro, the Inspector General's Reort, the memo in which the
>> Director of Central Intelligence authorizes the Castro assassination, and
>> more that you never even dreamed of.
> Pay attention Marsh. Helms was referring to an order by JFK to
> assassinate Castro written on paper. Have you found that one?
There would not be one. Helms knows that so he uses it to argue that we have to rely on HIS lies. Well, Helms testified to the Senate committee that JFK did not authorize the assassination of Castro. So which lie do you chose to believe?
>>> On May 7, 1962, the attorney general (Bobby) was briefed in full on the Rifle
>>> Project by the CIA?s general counsel, Lawrence Houston, and the agency?s
>> The Rifle project? You don't even know what you are talking about.
>> It was called ZR/RIFLE.
> The book said "Rifle".
That's my point. It shows that your source doesn't know what he is talking about.
>>> security chief, Sheffield Edwards. RFK was ?mad as hell-not mad about the
>>> assassination plot itself, but about the Mafia?s role in it. He did nothing to
>>> stop the CIA from seeking Castro?s death. Page 215.
>> As usual you omit the important details. RFK only learned about the Castro
>> plots by reading about them in the newspaper.
> This is laughable. Always has been and always will be.
> Then he told his brother and
>> JFK ordered him to get to the bottom of it, so Bobby called the CIA and
>> asked them if it was true or not. That is what started it. When Bobby
>> found out he ordered the CIA to stop the operation.
> You have this on paper? The book says Bobby did not stop it at all.
>>> Johnson still had no idea that the United States had been trying to kill Castro
>>> for the better part of three years. Very few people knew. One was Allen
>>> Dulles. Another was Richard Helms. A third was Bobby Kennedy. A fourth was
>>> very likely Fidel Castro. Page 260.
>> Hundreds of people knew that the CIA was trying to kill Castro. Anyone
>> who could buy a newspaper would know.
>> And as always you ignore the fact that the Castro plots started under
>> Eisenhower and the DCI then put his authorization on paper.
> Not at all Marsh. And when Kennedy became president Ike's order remained
> justification to continue the assassination attempts on Castro. Or at
> least it was justification in the eyes of the CIA.
It's hard for me to explain. I am not making excuses for Helms, but he really thought he had the continuing authorization carried over from the Eisenhower administration.
>>>>> A lot of "talk" about the possibility. No order from JFK. In November,
>>>>> 1961, JFK asked journalist Tad Szulc: ?What would you think if I ordered
>>>>> Castro to be assassinated?? JFK claimed that he was under ?terrible
>>>>> pressure? from his advisers.
>>>>> But already in 1960 Eisenhower had authorized the assassination of Castro
>>>>> and Richard Nixon had ordered the CIA to do it.
>>>> Legacy of Ashes: The history of the CIA, Tim Weiner.
>>>> In the words of Helms, when asked if JFK wanted Castro dead. ?There is
>>>> nothing on paper, of course, but there is certainly no question in my mind
>>>> that he did. Back to plausible denial, Marsh. It would have been very
>>>> sloppy work if you could find it on paper. Page 216.
>>> You know nothing about the world of intelligence.
>> That is pretty rich Marsh. One of us carried a Cach Wheel and codes for a
>> year. It wasn't you. One of us attended S-2 (thats intelligence for you)
>> briefings on operations planned based on intelligence they had received.
>> It wasn't you either. One of us led operations utilizing intelligence.
>> Again, it wasn't you. All you have is an armchair knowledge of
>> intelligence and most everything else. It would help if you had ever done
>> something in the real world.
>>>We did find it on paper.We found the CIA memos which outline the operations to
>>> assassinate Castro, the Inspector General's Reort, the memo in which the
>>> Director of Central Intelligence authorizes the Castro assassination, and
>>> more that you never even dreamed of.
>> Pay attention Marsh. Helms was referring to an order by JFK to
>> assassinate Castro written on paper. Have you found that one?
>There would not be one. Helms knows that so he uses it to argue that we >have to rely on HIS lies. Well, Helms testified to the Senate committee >that JFK did not authorize the assassination of Castro. So which lie do >you chose to believe?
Helms was a good soldier. He lied for JFK and he lied for Nixon. This is part
of the plausible denial and Helms put himself at risk for it. Did you know that
Helms didn't agree with these assassination operations?
>>>>On May 7, 1962, the attorney general (Bobby) was briefed in full on the Rifle
>>>> Project by the CIA?s general counsel, Lawrence Houston, and the agency?s
>>> The Rifle project? You don't even know what you are talking about.
>>> It was called ZR/RIFLE.
>> The book said "Rifle".
>That's my point. It shows that your source doesn't know what he is >talking about.
>>>> security chief, Sheffield Edwards. RFK was ?mad as hell-not mad about the
>>>>assassination plot itself, but about the Mafia?s role in it. He did nothing to
>>>> stop the CIA from seeking Castro?s death. Page 215.
>>> As usual you omit the important details. RFK only learned about the Castro
>>> plots by reading about them in the newspaper.
>> This is laughable. Always has been and always will be.
>> Then he told his brother and
>>> JFK ordered him to get to the bottom of it, so Bobby called the CIA and
>>> asked them if it was true or not. That is what started it. When Bobby
>>> found out he ordered the CIA to stop the operation.
>> You have this on paper? The book says Bobby did not stop it at all.
>Just as you did.
So you don't have this on paper. Of course if you did you would have burned it
long ago. Anything to keep Camelot shinning.
>>>>Johnson still had no idea that the United States had been trying to kill Castro
>>>> for the better part of three years. Very few people knew. One was Allen
>>>>Dulles. Another was Richard Helms. A third was Bobby Kennedy. A fourth was
>>>> very likely Fidel Castro. Page 260.
>>> Hundreds of people knew that the CIA was trying to kill Castro. Anyone
>>> who could buy a newspaper would know.
>>> And as always you ignore the fact that the Castro plots started under
>>> Eisenhower and the DCI then put his authorization on paper.
>> Not at all Marsh. And when Kennedy became president Ike's order remained
>> justification to continue the assassination attempts on Castro. Or at
>> least it was justification in the eyes of the CIA.
>It's hard for me to explain. I am not making excuses for Helms, but he >really thought he had the continuing authorization carried over from the >Eisenhower administration.
>>>>>> A lot of "talk" about the possibility. No order from JFK. In November,
>>>>>> 1961, JFK asked journalist Tad Szulc: ?What would you think if I ordered
>>>>>> Castro to be assassinated?? JFK claimed that he was under ?terrible
>>>>>> pressure? from his advisers.
>>>>>> But already in 1960 Eisenhower had authorized the assassination of Castro
>>>>>> and Richard Nixon had ordered the CIA to do it.
>>>>> Legacy of Ashes: The history of the CIA, Tim Weiner.
>>>>> In the words of Helms, when asked if JFK wanted Castro dead. ?There is
>>>>> nothing on paper, of course, but there is certainly no question in my mind
>>>>> that he did. Back to plausible denial, Marsh. It would have been very
>>>>> sloppy work if you could find it on paper. Page 216.
>>>> You know nothing about the world of intelligence.
>>> That is pretty rich Marsh. One of us carried a Cach Wheel and codes for a
>>> year. It wasn't you. One of us attended S-2 (thats intelligence for you)
>>> briefings on operations planned based on intelligence they had received.
>>> It wasn't you either. One of us led operations utilizing intelligence.
>>> Again, it wasn't you. All you have is an armchair knowledge of
>>> intelligence and most everything else. It would help if you had ever done
>>> something in the real world.
>>>> We did find it on paper.We found the CIA memos which outline the operations to
>>>> assassinate Castro, the Inspector General's Reort, the memo in which the
>>>> Director of Central Intelligence authorizes the Castro assassination, and
>>>> more that you never even dreamed of.
>>> Pay attention Marsh. Helms was referring to an order by JFK to
>>> assassinate Castro written on paper. Have you found that one?
>> There would not be one. Helms knows that so he uses it to argue that we
>> have to rely on HIS lies. Well, Helms testified to the Senate committee
>> that JFK did not authorize the assassination of Castro. So which lie do
>> you chose to believe?
> Helms was a good soldier. He lied for JFK and he lied for Nixon. This is part
No, he was not a good soldier. He was a professional CIA officer. He did not lie FOR JFK. He lied TO JFK. And lied to Nixon and refused to cooperate with Nixon's cover-up of Watergate which why Nixon fired him. JFK would have fired him, but Helms got him first. Then Helms got rid of Nixon to prevent Nixon from firing a quarter of the CIA. The guy who blew the lid off Watergate reported directly to Helms. If it makes you feel any better you can justify all the things Helms did by saying that he did it for the good of the country.
Presidents come and go, but the CIA always remains and refuses to reform. Helms' only loyalty was to the Company, not the President, not the country, not any person.
> of the plausible denial and Helms put himself at risk for it. Did you know that
> Helms didn't agree with these assassination operations?
Prove what you are trying to say. Helms certainly pointed out the technical flaws in some of the planned attacks. But he never stopped the planning or objected to the goal.
He was squeamish about CIA officers meeting direct with the Mafia.
>>>>> On May 7, 1962, the attorney general (Bobby) was briefed in full on the Rifle
>>>>> Project by the CIA?s general counsel, Lawrence Houston, and the agency?s
>>>> The Rifle project? You don't even know what you are talking about.
>>>> It was called ZR/RIFLE.
>>> The book said "Rifle".
>> That's my point. It shows that your source doesn't know what he is
>> talking about.
> BFD.
Shows that you know nothing about the subject and believe whatever you read as long as it reinforces your prejudices.
>>>>> security chief, Sheffield Edwards. RFK was ?mad as hell-not mad about the
>>>>> assassination plot itself, but about the Mafia?s role in it. He did nothing to
>>>>> stop the CIA from seeking Castro?s death. Page 215.
>>>> As usual you omit the important details. RFK only learned about the Castro
>>>> plots by reading about them in the newspaper.
>>> This is laughable. Always has been and always will be.
>>> Then he told his brother and
>>>> JFK ordered him to get to the bottom of it, so Bobby called the CIA and
>>>> asked them if it was true or not. That is what started it. When Bobby
>>>> found out he ordered the CIA to stop the operation.
>>> You have this on paper? The book says Bobby did not stop it at all.
>> Just as you did.
> So you don't have this on paper. Of course if you did you would have burned it
> long ago. Anything to keep Camelot shinning.
I am not the one burning documents. Your beloved government is. Helms ordered millions of documents destroyed and you approve of that. I am the only one badgering the Kennedy Library to release the transcripts of WH recordings which they even refuse to admit having. Not you.
>>>>> Johnson still had no idea that the United States had been trying to kill Castro
>>>>> for the better part of three years. Very few people knew. One was Allen
>>>>> Dulles. Another was Richard Helms. A third was Bobby Kennedy. A fourth was
>>>>> very likely Fidel Castro. Page 260.
>>>> Hundreds of people knew that the CIA was trying to kill Castro. Anyone
>>>> who could buy a newspaper would know.
>>>> And as always you ignore the fact that the Castro plots started under
>>>> Eisenhower and the DCI then put his authorization on paper.
>>> Not at all Marsh. And when Kennedy became president Ike's order remained
>>> justification to continue the assassination attempts on Castro. Or at
>>> least it was justification in the eyes of the CIA.
>> It's hard for me to explain. I am not making excuses for Helms, but he
>> really thought he had the continuing authorization carried over from the
>> Eisenhower administration.
>>>>>>> A lot of "talk" about the possibility. No order from JFK. In November,
>>>>>>> 1961, JFK asked journalist Tad Szulc: ?What would you think if I ordered
>>>>>>> Castro to be assassinated?? JFK claimed that he was under ?terrible
>>>>>>> pressure? from his advisers.
>>>>>>>But already in 1960 Eisenhower had authorized the assassination of Castro
>>>>>>> and Richard Nixon had ordered the CIA to do it.
>>>>>> Legacy of Ashes: The history of the CIA, Tim Weiner.
>>>>>> In the words of Helms, when asked if JFK wanted Castro dead. ?There is
>>>>>>nothing on paper, of course, but there is certainly no question in my mind
>>>>>> that he did. Back to plausible denial, Marsh. It would have been very
>>>>>> sloppy work if you could find it on paper. Page 216.
>>>>> You know nothing about the world of intelligence.
>>>> That is pretty rich Marsh. One of us carried a Cach Wheel and codes for a
>>>> year. It wasn't you. One of us attended S-2 (thats intelligence for you)
>>>> briefings on operations planned based on intelligence they had received.
>>>> It wasn't you either. One of us led operations utilizing intelligence.
>>>> Again, it wasn't you. All you have is an armchair knowledge of
>>>> intelligence and most everything else. It would help if you had ever done
>>>> something in the real world.
>>>>>We did find it on paper.We found the CIA memos which outline the operations to
>>>>> assassinate Castro, the Inspector General's Reort, the memo in which the
>>>>> Director of Central Intelligence authorizes the Castro assassination, and
>>>>> more that you never even dreamed of.
>>>> Pay attention Marsh. Helms was referring to an order by JFK to
>>>> assassinate Castro written on paper. Have you found that one?
>>> There would not be one. Helms knows that so he uses it to argue that we
>>> have to rely on HIS lies. Well, Helms testified to the Senate committee
>>> that JFK did not authorize the assassination of Castro. So which lie do
>>> you chose to believe?
>>Helms was a good soldier. He lied for JFK and he lied for Nixon. This is part
>No, he was not a good soldier. He was a professional CIA officer. He did >not lie FOR JFK. He lied TO JFK. And lied to Nixon and refused to >cooperate with Nixon's cover-up of Watergate which why Nixon fired him. >JFK would have fired him, but Helms got him first. Then Helms got rid of >Nixon to prevent Nixon from firing a quarter of the CIA. The guy who blew >the lid off Watergate reported directly to Helms. If it makes you feel any >better you can justify all the things Helms did by saying that he did it >for the good of the country.
>Presidents come and go, but the CIA always remains and refuses to reform. >Helms' only loyalty was to the Company, not the President, not the >country, not any person.
Presidents might come and go but they also remain the same. They all misused
the CIA.
Now while it might be camp for you and your ink to whine about the CIA being a
rouge elephant you need to look at the bigger rouge elephant (our
presidents)often pushing them. That includes JFK.
>>of the plausible denial and Helms put himself at risk for it. Did you know that
>> Helms didn't agree with these assassination operations?
>Prove what you are trying to say. Helms certainly pointed out the >technical flaws in some of the planned attacks. But he never stopped the >planning or objected to the goal.
>He was squeamish about CIA officers meeting direct with the Mafia.
>>>>>>On May 7, 1962, the attorney general (Bobby) was briefed in full on the Rifle
>>>>>> Project by the CIA?s general counsel, Lawrence Houston, and the agency?s
>>>>> The Rifle project? You don't even know what you are talking about.
>>>>> It was called ZR/RIFLE.
>>>> The book said "Rifle".
>>> That's my point. It shows that your source doesn't know what he is
>>> talking about.
>> BFD.
>Shows that you know nothing about the subject and believe whatever you >read as long as it reinforces your prejudices.
>>>>>>security chief, Sheffield Edwards. RFK was ?mad as hell-not mad about the
>>>>>>assassination plot itself, but about the Mafia?s role in it. He did nothing to
>>>>>> stop the CIA from seeking Castro?s death. Page 215.
>>>>> As usual you omit the important details. RFK only learned about the Castro
>>>>> plots by reading about them in the newspaper.
>>>> This is laughable. Always has been and always will be.
>>>> Then he told his brother and
>>>>> JFK ordered him to get to the bottom of it, so Bobby called the CIA and
>>>>> asked them if it was true or not. That is what started it. When Bobby
>>>>> found out he ordered the CIA to stop the operation.
>>>> You have this on paper? The book says Bobby did not stop it at all.
>>> Just as you did.
>>So you don't have this on paper. Of course if you did you would have burned it
>> long ago. Anything to keep Camelot shinning.
>I am not the one burning documents. Your beloved government is. Helms >ordered millions of documents destroyed and you approve of that. I am the >only one badgering the Kennedy Library to release the transcripts of WH >recordings which they even refuse to admit having. Not you.
>>>>>>Johnson still had no idea that the United States had been trying to kill Castro
>>>>>> for the better part of three years. Very few people knew. One was Allen
>>>>>>Dulles. Another was Richard Helms. A third was Bobby Kennedy. A fourth was
>>>>>> very likely Fidel Castro. Page 260.
>>>>> Hundreds of people knew that the CIA was trying to kill Castro. Anyone
>>>>> who could buy a newspaper would know.
>>>>> And as always you ignore the fact that the Castro plots started under
>>>>> Eisenhower and the DCI then put his authorization on paper.
>>>> Not at all Marsh. And when Kennedy became president Ike's order remained
>>>> justification to continue the assassination attempts on Castro. Or at
>>>> least it was justification in the eyes of the CIA.
>>> It's hard for me to explain. I am not making excuses for Helms, but he
>>> really thought he had the continuing authorization carried over from the
>>> Eisenhower administration.
>>>>>>>> A lot of "talk" about the possibility. No order from JFK. In November,
>>>>>>>> 1961, JFK asked journalist Tad Szulc: ?What would you think if I ordered
>>>>>>>> Castro to be assassinated?? JFK claimed that he was under ?terrible
>>>>>>>> pressure? from his advisers.
>>>>>>>> But already in 1960 Eisenhower had authorized the assassination of Castro
>>>>>>>> and Richard Nixon had ordered the CIA to do it.
>>>>>>> Legacy of Ashes: The history of the CIA, Tim Weiner.
>>>>>>> In the words of Helms, when asked if JFK wanted Castro dead. ?There is
>>>>>>> nothing on paper, of course, but there is certainly no question in my mind
>>>>>>> that he did. Back to plausible denial, Marsh. It would have been very
>>>>>>> sloppy work if you could find it on paper. Page 216.
>>>>>> You know nothing about the world of intelligence.
>>>>> That is pretty rich Marsh. One of us carried a Cach Wheel and codes for a
>>>>> year. It wasn't you. One of us attended S-2 (thats intelligence for you)
>>>>> briefings on operations planned based on intelligence they had received.
>>>>> It wasn't you either. One of us led operations utilizing intelligence.
>>>>> Again, it wasn't you. All you have is an armchair knowledge of
>>>>> intelligence and most everything else. It would help if you had ever done
>>>>> something in the real world.
>>>>>> We did find it on paper.We found the CIA memos which outline the operations to
>>>>>> assassinate Castro, the Inspector General's Reort, the memo in which the
>>>>>> Director of Central Intelligence authorizes the Castro assassination, and
>>>>>> more that you never even dreamed of.
>>>>> Pay attention Marsh. Helms was referring to an order by JFK to
>>>>> assassinate Castro written on paper. Have you found that one?
>>>> There would not be one. Helms knows that so he uses it to argue that we
>>>> have to rely on HIS lies. Well, Helms testified to the Senate committee
>>>> that JFK did not authorize the assassination of Castro. So which lie do
>>>> you chose to believe?
>>> Helms was a good soldier. He lied for JFK and he lied for Nixon. This is part
>> No, he was not a good soldier. He was a professional CIA officer. He did
>> not lie FOR JFK. He lied TO JFK. And lied to Nixon and refused to
>> cooperate with Nixon's cover-up of Watergate which why Nixon fired him.
>> JFK would have fired him, but Helms got him first. Then Helms got rid of
>> Nixon to prevent Nixon from firing a quarter of the CIA. The guy who blew
>> the lid off Watergate reported directly to Helms. If it makes you feel any
>> better you can justify all the things Helms did by saying that he did it
>> for the good of the country.
>> Presidents come and go, but the CIA always remains and refuses to reform.
>> Helms' only loyalty was to the Company, not the President, not the
>> country, not any person.
> Presidents might come and go but they also remain the same. They all misused
> the CIA.
> Now while it might be camp for you and your ink to whine about the CIA being a
> rouge elephant you need to look at the bigger rouge elephant (our
> presidents)often pushing them. That includes JFK.
Oh, I see. So you think the CIA are such cowards that they would not try to assassinate a foreign leader unless the President forced them to? What were the exact words that Richard Helms used to tell Richard Nixon that he would not follow Nixon's orders to cover up the Watergate conspiracy?
>>> of the plausible denial and Helms put himself at risk for it. Did you know that
>>> Helms didn't agree with these assassination operations?
>> Prove what you are trying to say. Helms certainly pointed out the
>> technical flaws in some of the planned attacks. But he never stopped the
>> planning or objected to the goal.
>> He was squeamish about CIA officers meeting direct with the Mafia.
>>>>>>> On May 7, 1962, the attorney general (Bobby) was briefed in full on the Rifle
>>>>>>> Project by the CIA?s general counsel, Lawrence Houston, and the agency?s
>>>>>> The Rifle project? You don't even know what you are talking about.
>>>>>> It was called ZR/RIFLE.
>>>>> The book said "Rifle".
>>>> That's my point. It shows that your source doesn't know what he is
>>>> talking about.
>>> BFD.
>> Shows that you know nothing about the subject and believe whatever you
>> read as long as it reinforces your prejudices.
>>>>>>> security chief, Sheffield Edwards. RFK was ?mad as hell-not mad about the
>>>>>>> assassination plot itself, but about the Mafia?s role in it. He did nothing to
>>>>>>> stop the CIA from seeking Castro?s death. Page 215.
>>>>>> As usual you omit the important details. RFK only learned about the Castro
>>>>>> plots by reading about them in the newspaper.
>>>>> This is laughable. Always has been and always will be.
>>>>> Then he told his brother and
>>>>>> JFK ordered him to get to the bottom of it, so Bobby called the CIA and
>>>>>> asked them if it was true or not. That is what started it. When Bobby
>>>>>> found out he ordered the CIA to stop the operation.
>>>>> You have this on paper? The book says Bobby did not stop it at all.
>>>> Just as you did.
>>> So you don't have this on paper. Of course if you did you would have burned it
>>> long ago. Anything to keep Camelot shinning.
>> I am not the one burning documents. Your beloved government is. Helms
>> ordered millions of documents destroyed and you approve of that. I am the
>> only one badgering the Kennedy Library to release the transcripts of WH
>> recordings which they even refuse to admit having. Not you.
>>>>>>> Johnson still had no idea that the United States had been trying to kill Castro
>>>>>>> for the better part of three years. Very few people knew. One was Allen
>>>>>>> Dulles. Another was Richard Helms. A third was Bobby Kennedy. A fourth was
>>>>>>> very likely Fidel Castro. Page 260.
>>>>>> Hundreds of people knew that the CIA was trying to kill Castro. Anyone
>>>>>> who could buy a newspaper would know.
>>>>>> And as always you ignore the fact that the Castro plots started under
>>>>>> Eisenhower and the DCI then put his authorization on paper.
>>>>> Not at all Marsh. And when Kennedy became president Ike's order remained
>>>>> justification to continue the assassination attempts on Castro. Or at
>>>>> least it was justification in the eyes of the CIA.
>>>> It's hard for me to explain. I am not making excuses for Helms, but he
>>>> really thought he had the continuing authorization carried over from the
>>>> Eisenhower administration.
