Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Site Notices
Posted: 4/25/2022 1:52:48 PM EDT
Found a series of articles last night about the Bay of Pigs. It's in 3 parts by Humberto Fontova  This is from TownHall.com, but they're also published on other websites.

Here are the links to the three parts:
Here's how part 1 opens up:
"The Republicans have allowed a communist dictatorship to flourish eight jet minutes from our bordersWe must support anti-Castro fighters. So far these freedom fighters have received no help from our government."(Presidential candidate John F. Kennedy baiting Richard Nixon during the famous 1960 debates.)

Short weeks before the debates CIA chief Allen Dulles (on President Eisenhower's orders) had briefed Kennedy about Cuban invasion plans (what became the Bay of Pigs invasion,) so Kennedy was lying through his teeth. He knew damn well the Republican administration was training Cuban freedom fighters. And since the plans were secret, he knew damn well Nixon couldn't rebut. So Nixon bit his tongue. He could easily have stomped Kennedy on it. But to some candidates national security trumps debating points.

To blindside his Republican opponent Kennedy relied on that opponent's patriotism. Let's face it, Republicans are at a woeful disadvantage here. Nixon bit his tongue. He could easily have stomped Kennedy on it. But to some candidates national security (and those freedom-fighters lives) outweighs debating points.

"We shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and success of liberty," proclaimed President Kennedy at his inauguration.
View Quote
As I am no fan of JFK, I like, no, I enjoy reading things that confirm my bias of him. (I don't believe the PT 109 Hollywood/Camelot version of things. One thing I did not know about was just how well the invading Cubans did initially and how well they destroyed what units counter-attacked them.

The invaders, or Liberators if you like, might have actually established a defendable area on Cuba. The Castros and their on-ground Soviet advisors were very slow in their reaction. If they had succeeded, two questions come to mind.

First, what would the Soviet response be? The USSR was far away. A lot of Cuban troops were in other Latin American countries fomenting violent International Revolution, as per theory. There would not be much the Soviets could do right then and there. Surfacing a submarine would be counter-productive while even flying in Paratroops would've taken time. When the "Iron Curtain" fell, things went fast in the Warsaw Pact Nations. Romania comes to mind first.

Second, if everything went according to the Plan that the Eisenhower Admin developed and implemented, and mission goals achieved (Castro ovethrown etc.), Kennedy would've been hailed as a hero, a real genuine hero. So, why did he literally blow things off? That's the real mystery. Kennedy's actual response was to put missiles in Italy and Turkey which directly led to the "Cuban Missile Crisis" of OCT1962 and damn near getting everybody killed. Was it the drugs??? Don't know, but Kennedy was a douche.

This excerpt is from part II. I have no idea how close it is to the truth as the people involved are dead, so no real way to prove, or disprove the quotes, but I can see this happening:
Camelot's criminal idiocy as the freedom-fighters battle savagely against outrageous odds finally brought Adm. Arleigh Burke of the Joints Chief of Staff, who was receiving the battlefield pleas, to the brink of mutiny. Years earlier, Adm. Burke sailed thousands of miles to smash his nation's enemies at the Battle of Leyte Gulf. Now he was Chief of Naval Operations and stood aghast as new enemies were being given a sanctuary 90 miles away!

The fighting admiral was livid. They say his face was beet red and his facial veins popping as he faced down his commander-in-chief that fateful night of April 18, 1961. "Mr. President, TWO planes from the Essex! That's all those Cuban boys need, Mr. President. Let me order...!"

JFK was in white tails and a bow tie that evening, having just emerged from an elegant social gathering. "Burke," he replied. "We can't get involved in this."

"WE put those Cuban boys there, Mr. President!" The fighting admiral exploded. "By God, we ARE involved!"

Finally, JFK relented and allowed some Skyhawk jets to take-off from the Essex. One of these pilots quickly spotted a long column of Castro's Soviet tanks making for the freedom-fighters. The Soviet tanks and trucks were sitting ducks. "AHA!" he thought. "Now we'll turn this thing around!" The pilot started his dive...

"Permission to engage denied," came the answer from his commander.
View Quote



Link Posted: 4/25/2022 2:22:18 PM EDT
[#1]
Link Posted: 4/25/2022 2:35:15 PM EDT
[#2]
That's a lot of reading I don't have time for so let me ask, does it address in any depth the reason the Soviets moved missiles to Cuba being in response to U S. Missiles in Turkey?

Does it mention that the Soviets agreed to withdraw their missiles provided the U.S. withdrew ours from Turkey?

I see Allen Dulles mentioned,  the same Dulles that Kennedy fired who also sat on the Warren Commision.

If you want a good insight on the virtually unlimited nefarious skullduggery the American Government and Intelligence community engage in currently , study their action following WWII through the mid 70's. Nothing has changed.
Link Posted: 8/30/2022 10:51:09 PM EDT
[#3]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By bgenlvtex:
That's a lot of reading I don't have time for so let me ask, does it address in any depth the reason the Soviets moved missiles to Cuba being in response to U S. Missiles in Turkey?

Does it mention that the Soviets agreed to withdraw their missiles provided the U.S. withdrew ours from Turkey?

I see Allen Dulles mentioned,  the same Dulles that Kennedy fired who also sat on the Warren Commision.

If you want a good insight on the virtually unlimited nefarious skullduggery the American Government and Intelligence community engage in currently , study their action following WWII through the mid 70's. Nothing has changed.
View Quote
"Nope" to all of your questions. The only people who know this information are people who study History. While American News Media happily showed films photographed by Naval aircraft doing over flights of Soviet cargo ships heading back to the USSR, as part of the deescalation protocol, the Soviets showed their people the same kind  of films of American missiles loaded on American cargo ships from both Turkey and Italy heading back to the US.

The entire point was to make Kennedy look good after the debacle.
Link Posted: 8/30/2022 11:11:35 PM EDT
[#4]
Just found a new article written by the same Lipscomb guy as in the other thread about Oswald. I'm just going to deal with the middle part of Lipscomb's essay as that can be corroborated in primary source papers.

The Bay of Pigs Invasion: What Really Happened?

It's subtitled as, "Was President Kennedy or the CIA responsible for the failed Cuban operation in 1961?"

Again, I'm just going to deal with the middle part of his essay. The last part it seems to me is a lot of conjecture while the first part is set up.

Quotes:
Kennedy began his reputation-rehabilitation campaign by a most curious face-saving meeting with his predecessor, President Eisenhower, just as the last defeated remnants of his Bay of Pigs invasion force were being marched to prison in Havana. On April 22, 1961   just five days after the Bay of Pigs fiasco   President Kennedy sent a helicopter to Ike's Gettysburg farm to fly him to Camp David for secret talks.

He told Eisenhower that he had followed the advice of the CIA and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and "everybody had approved" the invasion. The meeting itself, if not the private talks, was set up for major public consumption with dozens of reporters and photographers and a full contingent of military aides. Kennedy was publicly signaling his careful consultation with America's preeminent military hero, while he was privately blaming the Eisenhower plan that had failed him to anyone who would listen.

Eisenhower informed Kennedy in short terms that not only had the operation been a military disaster, but it had been worse: it had let Khrushchev see that he was weak. "I just took their advice," Kennedy pleaded, meaning the CIA and the Chiefs of Staff. After leaving the meeting, the new president was visibly shaken.
View Quote
edited to here -
Kennedy's heavily publicized meeting with Eisenhower   the man whose plan supposedly had blown up on Kennedy   was a well-planned exercise in duplicity. However, Eisenhower's notes on the meeting clarify the reality behind the intended obfuscation.

The key point turned on Kennedy's paramount concern to Eisenhower about undertaking the Cuban invasion: "the State Department 'thought that we should be very careful that our hand not show in this operation.' If the United States airplanes carried out airstrikes, the diplomats argued, there would be no question of American involvement. They persuaded him to cancel a second bombing run in support of the exiles because 'the Soviets would be very apt to cause trouble in Berlin.'"
View Quote
This part is Eisenhower's response:
Ike was astounded by this reasoning. Everyone would know that the United States had been complicit. Where else would the invaders have gotten their ships, their arms, and their communications?

Ike says that he told Kennedy that there was "only one thing to do when you go into this kind of thing. It must be a success."

In one sentence, Eisenhower demonstrated what Kennedy's real failure had been at the Bay of Pigs: he had sacrificed military effectiveness for absurd political public relations concerns. It hadn't been the advice of the CIA or the military which had doomed his venture, as he had stated to his close associates. Kennedy had been listening to the advice of the State Department, and his political advisers, in conducting a military operation.
View Quote
Now for some History that hasn't been disputed:
Indeed, there had been a carefully developed invasion plan. Eisenhower had commissioned it early in 1960 under Vice President Richard Nixon's direction. But Kennedy not only did not follow the Eisenhower plan, he made critical last-minute changes that doomed it to failure before it was executed, exactly as he had told Eisenhower   for political considerations.

That plan, called "Pluto," was created under the CIA's Richard Bissell.

Trinidad is a small city 200 miles from Havana, on the south coast of Cuba, in the province of Sancti Spiritus which is south of Santa Clara. From the immediate aftermath of Castro's revolution in 1959 to 1965, this area was the center of a large number of dissident groups opposing the Communist regime of Fidel Castro. From the earliest revolutionary allies of Castro who did not want a Communist state to former Batista supporters to small farmers resisting collectivism, it totaled thousands of people.
In the end, it would take Castro raising 250,000 militia members to finally suppress their uprising   four years after the Bay of Pigs in 1965.
View Quote
There's more History from here, but remarkably, it's actually a fast read. The TL:DR version is that Kennedy changed the plan in significant ways. Realty occurred, as it always does, and the new Kennedy chosen landing site, The Bay of Pigs, had a sand bar not allowing the ships to off load cargo. That was the beginning of the End. The change of the landing site also took the Brigade 2506 further away from their natural base of support as highlighted in blue above. The original plan was to have Brigade 2506 hook with with the anti-Castroites that lived there in sort of a replay of how Castro took over.


Link Posted: 9/4/2022 7:30:39 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Ligore] [#5]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By zoinks:
Just found a new article written by the same Lipscomb guy as in the other thread about Oswald. I'm just going to deal with the middle part of Lipscomb's essay as that can be corroborated in primary source papers.

The Bay of Pigs Invasion: What Really Happened?

It's subtitled as, "Was President Kennedy or the CIA responsible for the failed Cuban operation in 1961?"

Again, I'm just going to deal with the middle part of his essay. The last part it seems to me is a lot of conjecture while the first part is set up.

Quotes:
edited to here -
This part is Eisenhower's response:
Now for some History that hasn't been disputed:
There's more History from here, but remarkably, it's actually a fast read. The TL:DR version is that Kennedy changed the plan in significant ways. Realty occurred, as it always does, and the new Kennedy chosen landing site, The Bay of Pigs, had a sand bar not allowing the ships to off load cargo. That was the beginning of the End. The change of the landing site also took the Brigade 2506 further away from their natural base of support as highlighted in blue above. The original plan was to have Brigade 2506 hook with with the anti-Castroites that lived there in sort of a replay of how Castro took over.


View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By zoinks:
Just found a new article written by the same Lipscomb guy as in the other thread about Oswald. I'm just going to deal with the middle part of Lipscomb's essay as that can be corroborated in primary source papers.

The Bay of Pigs Invasion: What Really Happened?

It's subtitled as, "Was President Kennedy or the CIA responsible for the failed Cuban operation in 1961?"

Again, I'm just going to deal with the middle part of his essay. The last part it seems to me is a lot of conjecture while the first part is set up.

Quotes:
Kennedy began his reputation-rehabilitation campaign by a most curious face-saving meeting with his predecessor, President Eisenhower, just as the last defeated remnants of his Bay of Pigs invasion force were being marched to prison in Havana. On April 22, 1961   just five days after the Bay of Pigs fiasco   President Kennedy sent a helicopter to Ike's Gettysburg farm to fly him to Camp David for secret talks.

He told Eisenhower that he had followed the advice of the CIA and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and "everybody had approved" the invasion. The meeting itself, if not the private talks, was set up for major public consumption with dozens of reporters and photographers and a full contingent of military aides. Kennedy was publicly signaling his careful consultation with America's preeminent military hero, while he was privately blaming the Eisenhower plan that had failed him to anyone who would listen.

Eisenhower informed Kennedy in short terms that not only had the operation been a military disaster, but it had been worse: it had let Khrushchev see that he was weak. "I just took their advice," Kennedy pleaded, meaning the CIA and the Chiefs of Staff. After leaving the meeting, the new president was visibly shaken.
edited to here -
Kennedy's heavily publicized meeting with Eisenhower   the man whose plan supposedly had blown up on Kennedy   was a well-planned exercise in duplicity. However, Eisenhower's notes on the meeting clarify the reality behind the intended obfuscation.

The key point turned on Kennedy's paramount concern to Eisenhower about undertaking the Cuban invasion: "the State Department 'thought that we should be very careful that our hand not show in this operation.' If the United States airplanes carried out airstrikes, the diplomats argued, there would be no question of American involvement. They persuaded him to cancel a second bombing run in support of the exiles because 'the Soviets would be very apt to cause trouble in Berlin.'"
This part is Eisenhower's response:
Ike was astounded by this reasoning. Everyone would know that the United States had been complicit. Where else would the invaders have gotten their ships, their arms, and their communications?

Ike says that he told Kennedy that there was "only one thing to do when you go into this kind of thing. It must be a success."

In one sentence, Eisenhower demonstrated what Kennedy's real failure had been at the Bay of Pigs: he had sacrificed military effectiveness for absurd political public relations concerns. It hadn't been the advice of the CIA or the military which had doomed his venture, as he had stated to his close associates. Kennedy had been listening to the advice of the State Department, and his political advisers, in conducting a military operation.
Now for some History that hasn't been disputed:
Indeed, there had been a carefully developed invasion plan. Eisenhower had commissioned it early in 1960 under Vice President Richard Nixon's direction. But Kennedy not only did not follow the Eisenhower plan, he made critical last-minute changes that doomed it to failure before it was executed, exactly as he had told Eisenhower   for political considerations.

That plan, called "Pluto," was created under the CIA's Richard Bissell.

Trinidad is a small city 200 miles from Havana, on the south coast of Cuba, in the province of Sancti Spiritus which is south of Santa Clara. From the immediate aftermath of Castro's revolution in 1959 to 1965, this area was the center of a large number of dissident groups opposing the Communist regime of Fidel Castro. From the earliest revolutionary allies of Castro who did not want a Communist state to former Batista supporters to small farmers resisting collectivism, it totaled thousands of people.
In the end, it would take Castro raising 250,000 militia members to finally suppress their uprising   four years after the Bay of Pigs in 1965.
There's more History from here, but remarkably, it's actually a fast read. The TL:DR version is that Kennedy changed the plan in significant ways. Realty occurred, as it always does, and the new Kennedy chosen landing site, The Bay of Pigs, had a sand bar not allowing the ships to off load cargo. That was the beginning of the End. The change of the landing site also took the Brigade 2506 further away from their natural base of support as highlighted in blue above. The original plan was to have Brigade 2506 hook with with the anti-Castroites that lived there in sort of a replay of how Castro took over.



That is interesting how Castro didn't actually have full control of Cuba for so many years. Reminds me of how in China a general kept fighting for a number of years after Mao was supposed to be under complete control. One general that really fought while the others switched sides or ran for it.  The general couldn't be beaten in the field even though very outnumbered. No countries would sell the general weapons. Eventually a deal was struck and the general and his army left China. I only found out because by accident reading the day to day histories of countries around China. There was on this day this large army marched out of China per the peace deal that Britain had acted as the intermediatory.  They left through Myanmar to end up I don't know where. I was like what, I never heard of this before.
Link Posted: 9/5/2022 3:22:33 PM EDT
[#6]
Ligore, if you ever remember where you found a link about this, please post it!
I tried looking yesterday, but i only found references to the numbers of KMT generals who changed sides to Mao's forces between the years 1946 to 1948. There were a lot of them. It was cheaper to buy their allegiance than fight them.
Link Posted: 4/16/2023 9:23:32 PM EDT
[#7]
Two Tales of the Same City

It's the 62nd Anniversary of the Landing this week. Two articles, one is a puff piece from two years ago trying to compare JFK and Biden in a glorious light, and the second is by Humberto Fontova who is represented in many of the quotes above.

First article is Bay of Pigs has lessons for our time  . Let's get the relevant info:
It was 60 years ago this week that an uncertain new president launched an ill-conceived military venture of astonishing naivety. The scheme was straightforward and audacious: 1,400 U.S.-trained Cuban exiles would land at the Bay of Pigs and ignite a populist uprising that would topple a Soviet-backed communist revolutionary by the name of Fidel Castro.

It was an unmitigated disaster.

View Quote

More than anything, Kennedy learned that he would have to challenge the details and weigh the potential pitfalls of military action far more seriously, by asking more questions and probing more deeply.

Charles Bohlen, the well-regarded U.S. diplomat, walked with JFK in the Rose Garden days after the disaster and later recalled that the president "had realized he would have to go much deeper into any operation of the nature of this kind with the consequences it could have than he had in regards to the Bay of Pigs."

Kennedy had learned the hard way not to blindly trust the advice of his decorated military and intelligence chiefs, most of whom had assured him that success at the Bay of Pigs was overwhelmingly likely.

View Quote
In the opinion piece by Mr. Haas, let me just poison the water here with "worked for Al Gore", he ends the comparison between JFK and Biden right here at this historical point in time. This was 8 mounts before Afghanistan, and Hass doesn't get even close to the October crisis 5 months later.

Now, it's Senior Fontova's turn. An essay from yesterday: The Bay of Pigs 62nd Anniversary   What Really Happened
Fontova first starts off with acknowledging Haas's essay with the opening quote. Fontova then makes a connection with Haas and anti-American propaganda which we already recognize.
In fact, the military venture was expertly-planned and was anything but naive. The astonishing blunders and naivety were entirely Camelot's.

After it dropped in their lap with Nixon's electoral defeat, the New Frontiersmen insisted on sticking their manicured fingers and fumbling with almost everything planned on the orders of the Supreme Commander of Operation Overlord.

"Help the Cubans to the utmost," Eisenhower stressed to his successor while handing over the reins. "We cannot let Castro's government go on."

For starters, the original invasion plan by the CIA and its military partners (all WWII and Korea vets) picked the Cuban town of Trinidad as the landing site. This coastal town 100 miles east of the Bay of Pigs was originally chosen by the CIA and the military men because it was a hotbed of anti-Castro sentiment and offered good off-loading facilities.

Also, the nearby Escambray Mountains crawled with anti-communist guerrillas, who were giving the Castroites fits. These would join the invading force that also carried arms for them. Just as importantly, only two major roads led to Trinidad from the north, so any Castro troops moving in would have been sitting ducks for the freedom-fighter's small air force.

View Quote
The rest is ground we've covered, but we'll cover it again because it shouldn't be forgotten, not just in the sense of an historical event, but in the sacrifices of actual men's lives.
Alas, landing in a populated area like Trinidad was deemed "too noisy" by the guilt-stricken New Frontiersmen. They had a fetish about hiding the U.S. role (this massive secret!) Any hint of such a role might discomfit the Latin American "street," you see. The New Frontiersmen suffered a guilty conscience about such "Yankee bullying."

And, mercy me, what would the U.N. say? The Best and the Brightest suffered a veritable fit of the vapors just thinking about it. So back to the drawing board for the planners.

They returned with a landing site at the Bay of Pigs, a desolate swamp. This was worse from a military standpoint but had a good chance of success   given total air superiority, given the complete obliteration of Castro's air force. This was stressed by the military and CIA planners, just as it's stressed here by me. Don't let Camelot's Press Agency (the Beltway media and academia) feed you any malarkey about this all-important factor, please, amigos.

Idiotically (and tragically) 80 percent of the pre-invasion sorties by the freedom-fighter planes from Nicaragua -- the essential component of the plan to knock out Castro's air force on the ground as originally devised under the Eisenhower administration -- was canceled at the last moment by JFK on the advice of his Best and Brightest. The U.S. hand after the first air strike (that "HUGE SECRET!") was showing, you see.

So the flustered and guilt-stricken Knights of Camelot, while frantically fanning their blushing faces, nixed the next airstrikes literally in their tracks. Some of the freedom-fighter planes were already taxiing down the crude runways.    

View Quote
Just some more to drive the point home:
"WHAT?! Are they NUTS?!" bellowed Brigade Air Force chief Reid Doster when he learned that Kennedy had canceled most of the vital airstrikes to destroy Castro's small air force before the invasion. "There goes the whole f***ing war!"

The canceled airstrikes made the Brigade's lumbering B-26s easy prey for Castro's jets and fast Sea-Furies -- and the troops, ships and supplies below them were even easier prey. It was a turkey shoot for the Castroites.

But the unequal battle raged furiously on the tiny beachhead. "Where are the planes?" kept crackling over U.S. Navy radios two days later. "Where is our ammo? Send planes or we can't last!" Brigade Commander Jose San Roman kept pleading to the very U.S. fleet that escorted his men to the beachhead. Crazed by hunger and thirst, his men had been shooting and reloading without sleep for three days. By then many suspected they'd been abandoned by the Knights of Camelot.

That's when Castro's Soviet Howitzers opened up, huge 122 mm ones, four batteries' worth. They pounded 2,000 rounds into the freedom-fighters over a four-hour period. "It sounded like the end of the world," one said later. "Rommel's crack Afrika Corps broke and ran under a similar bombardment," wrote Haynes Johnson in his book, the Bay of Pigs. By that time the invaders were dazed, delirious with fatigue, thirst and hunger, too deafened by the bombardment to even hear orders. But these men (representing every race and social class in Cuba) were in no mood to emulate Rommel's crack Afrika Corps by retreating. Instead they were fortified by a resolve no conquering troops could ever call upon the burning duty to free their nation.

The term "liberation" was no abstraction to these men. No navel gazing about the merits of "regime change" for them. Sullen or hostile foreigners in sandals, beards, kiffeyehs, and strange robes wouldn't be the ones meeting them. They'd be bashing open prison doors and bulldozing down barbed wire, all right   but their own fathers, uncles, cousins and even sisters, aunts, daughters would be the ones staggering out to suffocate them with teary hugs and sobs.

One of 19 Cubans was a political prisoner that horrible year. Firing squads were murdering hundreds every week. Dozens of American citizens languished in Cuba's prison cells too.

"If things get rough," the heartsick CIA man Grayston Lynch radioed back, "we can come in and evacuate you."

"We will NOT be evacuated!" San Roman roared back to his friend Lynch. "We came here to fight! We don't want evacuation! We want more ammo! We want planes! This ends here!"

It seemed like Camelot's criminal idiocy had finally relented when Pres. Kennedy allowed some Skyhawk jets to take-off from the Essex, which was just offshore of the beachhead.  One of these pilots quickly spotted a long column of Castro tanks and infantry making for the freedom-fighters.  The Soviet tanks and trucks were sitting ducks. "Aha!" he thought. "Now we'll turn this thing around!" The pilot began his dive.

"Permission to engage denied," came the command.

"This is CRAZY!" he bellowed back. "Those guys are getting the hell shot out of them down there! I can see it!" Turned out, JFK had allowed them to fly and look but not to shoot!

View Quote

There's more if you want to read it.

Link Posted: 6/2/2023 12:08:22 AM EDT
[#8]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By bgenlvtex:
That's a lot of reading I don't have time for so let me ask, does it address in any depth the reason the Soviets moved missiles to Cuba being in response to U S. Missiles in Turkey?

Does it mention that the Soviets agreed to withdraw their missiles provided the U.S. withdrew ours from Turkey?

I see Allen Dulles mentioned,  the same Dulles that Kennedy fired who also sat on the Warren Commision.

If you want a good insight on the virtually unlimited nefarious skullduggery the American Government and Intelligence community engage in currently , study their action following WWII through the mid 70's. Nothing has changed.
View Quote

Yup.

This book changed my life, and eventually led me to the conclusion that our government is run by morons regardless of political affiliation.
Link Posted: 6/15/2023 7:23:39 PM EDT
[#9]
Wow  just stopped by the History threads to see what's in here. Holy Shit! A treasure chest.

Thanks for taking the time to post!
Link Posted: 6/15/2023 7:47:08 PM EDT
[#10]
I’ve done lots of reading on Kennedy, Johnson, Eisenhower, and Nixon.  
I believe:
that not a single person above was innocent.
The Deep State  got out of hand beginning in 1947.
Kennedy would have eventually pulled us out of Vietnam.
A lot of Southern Democrats despised JFK, but got along because of Johnson.
Don’t think Kennedy would have won a reelection.
Bush and Johnson knew something.
CIA and the FBI were the only ones that could cover it up and they were the investigators for the Warren Commission.
Nixon’s missing sections of tape disclosed stuff about the assassination.
Our country has never been the same.
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top