Spitfire List Web site and blog of anti-fascist researcher and radio personality Dave Emory.
The tag 'Coups d’Etat' is associated with 21 posts.

FTR #1054, FTR #1055 and FTR #1056 Interviews #23, #24 and #25 with Jim DiEugenio about “Destiny Betrayed”

These are the twenty-third, twenty-fourth and twenty-fifth (and concluding program) in a long series of interviews with Jim DiEugenio about his triumphal analysis of President Kennedy’s assassination and New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison’s heroic investigation of the killing.

The first interview begins with a telling editorial written for “The Washington Post” by former President Harry Truman.

Destiny Betrayed by Jim DiEugenio; Skyhorse Publishing [SC]; Copyright 1992, 2012 by Jim DiEugenio; ISBN 978-1-62087-056-3; pp. 378-379.

. . . . On December 22, 1963, Harry Truman wrote an editorial that was published in the Washington Post. The former President wrote that he had become “disturbed by the way the CIA had become diverted from its original assignment. It has become an operational and at times a policy-making arm of government.” He wrote that he never dreamed that this would happen when he signed the National Security Act. he thought it would be used for intelligence analysis, not “peacetime cloak and dagger operations.” He complained that the CIA had now become “so removed from its intended role that it is being interpreted as a symbol of sinister and mysterious foreign intrigue–and a subject for Cold War enemy propaganda.” Truman went as far as suggesting its operational arm be eliminated. He concluded with the warning that Americans have grown up learning respect for “our free institutions and for our ability to maintain a free and open society. There is something about the way the CIA has been functioning that is casting a shadow over out historic position and I feel hat we need to correct it.” . . . .

Former CIA Director (and then Warren Commission member) Allen Dulles visited Truman and attempted to get him to retract the statement. He dissembled about then CIA chief John McCone’s view of the editorial.

The focal point of the first two programs is the dramatic changes in U.S. foreign policy that occurred because of JFK’s assassination. Analysis in FTR #1056 continues the analysis of Kennedy’s foreign policy and concludes with riveting discussion of the striking policy undertakings of the Kennedy administration in the area of civil rights. Jim has written a marvelous, 4-part analysis of JFK’s civil rights policy.

Discussion of JFK’s foreign policy and how his murder changed that builds on, and supplements analysis of this in FTR #1031, FTR #1032 and FTR #1033.

Lyndon Baines Johnson reversed JFK’s foreign policy initiatives in a number of important ways.

When the United States reneged on its commitment to pursue independence for the colonial territories of its European allies at the end of the Second World War, the stage was set for those nations’ desire for freedom to be cast as incipient Marxists/Communists. This development was the foundation for epic bloodshed and calamity.

Jim details then Congressman John F. Kennedy’s 1951 fact-finding trip to Saigon to gain an understanding of the French war to retain their colony of Indochina. (Vietnam was part of that colony.)

In speaking with career diplomat Edmund Gullion, Kennedy came to the realization that not only would the French lose the war, but that Ho Chi Minh and the Viet Minh guerrillas enjoyed great popular support among the Vietnamese people.

This awareness guided JFK’s Vietnam policy, in which he not only resisted tremendous pressure to commit U.S. combat troops to Vietnam, but planned a withdrawal of U.S. forces from Vietnam.

Perhaps the most important change made after JFK’s assassination was Johnson’s negation of Kennedy’s plans to withdraw from Vietnam.

LBJ cancelled Kennedy’s scheduled troop withdrawal, scheduled personnel increases and implemented the 34A program of covert operations against North Vietnam. Executed by South Vietnamese naval commandos using small, American-made patrol boats, these raids were supported by U.S. destroyers in the Gulf of Tonkin, which were electronically “fingerprinting” North Vietnamese radar installations.

The electronic fingerprinting of North Vietnamese radar was in anticipation of a pre-planned air war, a fundamental part of a plan by LBJ to involve the United States in a full-scale war in Southeast Asia.

Destiny Betrayed by Jim DiEugenio; Skyhorse Publishing [SC]; Copyright 1992, 2012 by Jim DiEugenio; ISBN 978-1-62087-056-3; pp. 368-371.

. . . . Clearly now that the withdrawal was imminent, Kennedy was going to try and get the rest of his administration on board to his way of thinking. Not only did this not happen once Kennedy was dead, but the first meeting on Vietnam afterwards was a strong indication that things were now going to be cast in a sharply different tone. This meeting took place at 3:00 p.m. on November 24. . . . Johnson’s intent was clear to McNamara. He was breaking with the previous policy. The goal now was to win the war. LBJ then issued a strong warning: He wanted no more dissension or division over policy. Any person who did not conform would be removed. (This would later be demonstrated by his banning of Hubert Humphrey from Vietnam meetings when Humphrey advised Johnson to rethink his policy of military commitment to Vietnam.) . . . . The reader should recall, this meeting took place just forty-eight hours after Kennedy was killed. . . .

. . . . Therefore, on March 2, 1964, the Joint Chiefs passed a new war proposal to the White House. This was even more ambitious than the January version. It included bombing, the mining of North Vietnamese harbors, a naval blockade, and possible use of tactical atomic weapons in case China intervened. Johnson was now drawing up a full scale battle plan for Vietnam. In other words, what Kennedy did not do in three years, LBJ had done in three months.

Johnson said he was not ready for this proposal since he did not have congress yet as a partner and trustee. But he did order the preparation of NSAM 288, which was based on this proposal. It was essentially a target list of bombing sites that eventually reached 94 possibilities. By May 25, with Richard Nixon and Barry Goldwater clamoring for bombing of the north, LBJ had made the decision that the U.S. would directly attack North Vietnam at an unspecified point in the future. But it is important to note that even before the Tonkin Gulf incident, Johnson had ordered the drawing up of a congressional resolution. This had been finalized by William Bundy, McGeorge Bundy’s brother. Therefore in June of 1964, Johnson began lobbying certain people for its passage in congress. . . .

National Security Memorandum 263

. . . . Johnson seized upon the hazy and controversial events in the Gulf of Tonkin during the first week of August to begin he air war planned in NSAM 288. Yet the Tonkin Gulf incident had been prepared by Johnson himself. After Kennedy’s death, President Johnson made a few alterations in the draft of NSAM 273. An order which Kennedy had never seen but was drafted by McGeorge Bundy after a meeting in Honolulu, a meeting which took place while Kennedy was visiting Texas. . . .

. . . . On August 2, the destroyer Maddox was attacked by three North Vietnamese torpedo boats. Although torpedoes were launched, none hit. The total damage to the Maddox
was one bullet through the hull. Both Johnson and the Defense Department misrepresented this incident to congress and the press. They said the North Vietnamese fired first, that the USA had no role in the patrol boat raids, that the ships were in international waters, and there was no hot pursuit by the Maddox. These were all wrong. Yet Johnson used this overblown reporting, plus a non-existent attack two nights later on the destroyer Turner Joy to begin to push his war resolution through Congress. He then took out the target list assembled for NSAM 288 [from March of 1964–D.E] and ordered air strikes that very day. . . .

. . . . For on August 7, Johnson sent a message to General Maxwell Taylor. He wanted a whole gamut of possible operations presented to him for direct American attacks against the North. The target date for the systematic air war was set for January 1965. This was called operation Rolling Thunder and it ended up being the largest bombing campaign in military history. The reader should note: the January target date was the month Johnson would be inaugurated after his re-election. As John Newman noted in his masterful book JFK and Vietnam, Kennedy was disguising his withdrawal plan around his re-election; Johnson was disguising his escalation plan around his re-election. . . .

In addition to noting that Hubert Humphrey, contrary to popular misconception, was an opponent of Johnson’s war strategy, we note that Robert McNamara was also opposed to it, although he went along with the Commander in Chief’s policies.

After detailed discussion of the human and environmental damage inflicted on Vietnam and the strategy implemented by LBJ after Kennedy’s assassination, the discussion turns to Johnson’s reversal of Kennedy’s policy with regard to Laos.

The fledgling nation of Laos was also part of French Indochina, and Jim notes how outgoing President Eisenhower coached President-Elect Kennedy on the necessity of committing U.S. combat forces to Laos.

Again, Kennedy refused to commit U.S. ground forces and engineered a policy of neutrality for Laos.

Destiny Betrayed by Jim DiEugenio; Skyhorse publishing [SC]; Copyright 1992, 2012 by Jim DiEugenio; ISBN 978-1-62087-056-3; p. 54.

. . . . At his first press conference, Kennedy said that he hoped to establish Laos as a “peaceful country–an independent country not dominated by either side.” He appointed a task force to study the problem, was in regular communication with it and the Laotian ambassador, and decided by February that Laos must have a coalition government, the likes of which Eisenhower had rejected out of hand. Kennedy also had little interest in a military solution. He could not understand sending American troops to fight for a country whose people did not care to fight for themselves. . . . He therefore worked to get the Russians to push the Pathet Lao into a cease-fire agreement. This included a maneuver on Kennedy’s part to indicate military pressure if the Russians did not intervene strongly enough with the Pathet Lao. The maneuver worked, and in May of 1961, a truce was called. A few days later, a conference convened in Geneva to hammer out conditions for a neutral Laos. By July of 1962, a new government, which included the Pathet Lao, had been hammered out. . . .

Whereas JFK had implemented a policy affording neutrality to Laos–against the wishes of the Joint Chiefs, CIA and many of his own cabinet, LBJ scrapped the neutralist policy in favor of a CIA-implemented strategy of employing “narco-militias” such as the Hmong tribesmen as combatants against the Pathet Lao. This counter-insurgency warfare was complemented by a massive aerial bombing campaign.

One of the many outgrowths of LBJ’s reversal of JFK’s Southeast policy was a wave of CIA-assisted heroin addicting both GI’s in Vietnam and American civilians at home.

LBJ also reversed JFK’s policy toward Indonesia.

In 1955, Sukarno hosted a conference of non-aligned nations that formalized and concretized a “Third Way” between East and West. This, along with Sukarno’s nationalism of some Dutch industrial properties, led the U.S. to try and overthrow Sukharno, which was attempted in 1958.

Kennedy understood Sukarno’s point of view, and had planned a trip to Indonesia in 1964 to forge a more constructive relationship with Sukharno. Obviously, his murder in 1963 precluded the trip.

In 1965, Sukarno was deposed in a bloody, CIA-aided coup in which as many as a million people were killed.

Of particular interest in connection with Indonesia, is the disposition of Freeport Sulphur, a company that had enlisted the services of both Clay Shaw and David Ferrie in an effort to circumvent limitations on its operations imposed by Castro’s Cuba:

Destiny Betrayed by Jim DiEugenio; Skyhorse publishing [SC]; Copyright 1992, 2012 by Jim DiEugenio; ISBN 978-1-62087-056-3; pp. 208-209.

. . . . In Chapter 1, the author introduced Freeport Sulphur and its subsidiaries Moa Bay Mining and Nicaro Nickel. These companies all had large investments in Cuba prior to Castro’s revolution. And this ended up being one of the ways that Garrison connected Clay Shaw and David Ferrie. This came about for two reasons. First, with Castro taking over their operations in Cuba, Freeport was attempting to investigate bringing in nickel ore from Cuba, through Canada, which still had trade relations with Cuba. The ore would then be refined in Louisiana, either at a plant already in New Orleans or at another plant in Braithwaite. Shaw, an impressario of international trade, was on this exploratory team for Freeport. And he and two other men had been flown to Canada by Ferrie as part of this effort. More evidence of this connection through Freeport was found during their investigation of Guy Banister. Banister apparently knew about another flight taken by Shaw with an official of Freeport, likely Charles Wight, to Cuba. Again the pilot was David Ferrie. Another reason this Freeport connection was important to Garrison is that he found a witness named James Plaine in Houston who said that Mr. Wight of Freeport Sulphur had contacted him in regards to an assassination plot against Castro. Considering the amount of money Freeport was about to lose in Cuba, plus the number of Eastern Establishment luminaries associated with the company–such as Jock Whitney, Jean Mauze and Godfrey Rockefeller–it is not surprising that such a thing was contemplated within their ranks. . . .

LBJ reversed Kennedy’s policy vis a vis Sukarno. It should be noted that Freeport had set its corporate sights on a very lucrative pair of mountains in Indonesia, both of which had enormous deposits of minerals, iron, copper, silver and gold in particular.

Destiny Betrayed by Jim DiEugenio; Skyhorse publishing [SC]; Copyright 1992, 2012 by Jim DiEugenio; ISBN 978-1-62087-056-3; pp. 374-375.

. . . . Shortly after, his aid bill landed on Johnson’s desk. The new president refused to sign it. . . .

. . . . In return for not signing the aid bill, in 1964, LBJ received support from Both Augustus Long and Jock Whitney of Freeport Sulphur in his race against Barry Goldwater. In fact, Long established a group called the National Independent Committee for Johnson. This group of wealthy businessmen included Robert Lehman of Lehman Brothers and Thomas Cabot, Michael Paine’s cousin. . . . Then, in early 1965, Augustus Long was rewarded for helping Johnson get elected. LBJ app[ointed him to the Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board. This is a small group of wealthy private citizens who advises the president on intelligence matters. The members of this group can approve and suggest covert activities abroad. This appointment is notable for what was about to occur. For with Sukarno now unprotected by President Kennedy, the writing was on the wall. The Central Intelligence Agency now bean to send into Indonesia its so called “first team.” . . . .

. . . . Suharto now began to sell off Indonesia’s riches to the highest bidder. Including Freeport Sulphur, which opened what were perhaps the largest copper and gold mines in the world there. . . . Freeport, along with several other companies, now harvested billions from the Suharto regime. . . .

Yet another area in which JFK’s policy outlook ran afoul of the prevailing wisdom of the Cold War was with regard to the Congo. A Belgian colony which was the victim of genocidal policies of King Leopold (estimates of the dead run as high as 8 million), the diamond and mineral-rich Congo gained a fragile independence.

In Africa, as well, Kennedy understood the struggle of emerging nations seeking freedom from colonial domination as falling outside of and transcending stereotyped Cold War dynamics.

In the Congo, the brutally administered Belgian rule had spawned a vigorous independence movement crystallized around the charismatic Patrice Lumumba. Understanding of, and sympathetic to Lumumba and the ideology and political forces embodied in him, Kennedy opposed the reactionary status quo favored by both European allies like the United Kingdom and Belgium, as well as the Eisenhower/Dulles axis in the United States.

Destiny Betrayed by Jim DiEugenio; Skyhorse publishing [SC]; Copyright 1992, 2012 by Jim DiEugenio; ISBN 978-1-62087-056-3; pp. 28-29.

. . . . By 1960, a native revolutionary leader named Patrice Lumumba had galvanized the nationalist feeling of the country. Belgium decided to pull out. But they did so rapidly, knowing that tumult would ensue and they could return to colonize the country again. After Lumumba was appointed prime minister, tumult did ensue. The Belgians and the British backed a rival who had Lumumba dismissed. They then urged the breaking away of the Katanga province because of its enormous mineral wealth. Lumumba looked to the United Nations for help, and also the USA. The former decided to help, . The United States did not. In fact, when Lumumba visited Washington July of 1960, Eisenhower deliberately fled to Rhode Island. Rebuffed by Eisenhower, Lumumba now turned to the Russians for help in expelling the Belgians from Katanga. This sealed his fate in the eyes of Eisenhower and Allen Dulles. The president now authorized a series of assassination plots by the CIA to kill Lumumba. These plots finally succeeded on January 17, 1961, three days before Kennedy was inaugurated.

His first week in office, Kennedy requested a full review of the Eisenhower/Dulles policy in Congo. The American ambassador to that important African nation heard of this review and phoned Allen Dulles to alert him that President Kennedy was about to overturn previous policy there. Kennedy did overturn this policy on February 2, 1961. Unlike Eisenhower and Allen Dulles, Kennedy announced he would begin full cooperation with Secretary Dag Hammarskjold at the United Nations on this thorny issue in order to bring all the armies in that war-torn nation under control. He would also attempt top neutralize the country so there would be no East/West Cold War competition. Third, all political prisoners being held should be freed. Not knowing he was dead, this part was aimed at former prime minister Lumumba, who had been captured by his enemies. (There is evidence that, knowing Kennedy would favor Lumumba, Dulles had him killed before JFK was inaugurated.) Finally, Kennedy opposed the secession of mineral-rich Katanga province. . . . Thus began Kennedy’s nearly three year long struggle to see Congo not fall back under the claw of European imperialism. . . . ”

In the Congo, as in Indonesia, LBJ reversed JFK’s policy stance, and the corporate looting of the Congo resulted under General Joseph Mobutu, himself a beneficiary of the piracy.

Destiny Betrayed by Jim DiEugenio; Skyhorse Publishing [SC]; Copyright 1992, 2012 by Jim DiEugenio; ISBN 978-1-62087-056-3; pp. 372-373.

. . . . But in October and November [of 1963], things began to fall apart. Kennedy wanted Colonel Michael Greene, an African expert, to train the Congolese army in order

to subdue a leftist rebellion. But General Joseph Mobutu, with the backing of the Pentagon, managed to resist this training, which the United Nations backed. In 1964, the communist rebellion picked up steam and began taking whole provinces. The White House did something Kennedy never seriously contemplated: unilateral action by the USA. Johnson and McGeorge Bundy had the CIA fly sorties with Cuban pilots to halt the communist advance. Without Kennedy, the UN now withdrew. America now became an ally of Belgium and intervened with arms, airplanes and advisers. Mobutu now invited Tshombe back into the government. Tshombe, perhaps at the request of the CIA, now said that the rebellion was part of a Chinese plot to take over Congo. Kennedy had called in Edmund Gullion to supervise the attempt to make the Congo government into a moderate coalition, avoiding the extremes of left and right. But with the Tshombe/Mobutu alliance, that was now dashed. Rightwing South Africans and Rhodesians were now allowed to join the Congolese army in a war on the “Chinese-inspired left.” And with the United Nations gone, this was all done under the auspices of the United States. The rightward tilt now continued unabated. By 1965, Mobutu had gained complete power. And in 1966, he installed himself as military dictator. . . . Mobutu now allowed his country to be opened up to loads of outside investment. The riches of the Congo were mined by huge Western corporations. Their owners and officers grew wealthy while Mobutu’s subjects were mired in poverty. Mobutu also stifled political dissent. And he now became one of the richest men in Africa, perhaps the world. . . .

In FTR #1033, we examined JFK’s attempts at normalizing relations with Cuba. That, of course, vanished with his assassination and the deepening of Cold War hostility between the U.S. and the Island nation, with a thaw of sorts coming under Barack Obama a few years ago.

There is no more striking area in which JFK’s murder reversed what would have been historic changes in America’s foreign policy than U.S.-Soviet relations.

JFK had implemented a ban on atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons, bitterly opposed by the Pentagon, In a June, 1963 speech at American University, JFK called for re-evaluating America’s relationship to the Soviet Union, and cited the U.S.S.R’s decisive role in defeating Nazi Germany during World War II.

JFK was also proposing joint space exploration with the Soviet Union, which would have appeared to be nothing less than treasonous to the Pentagon and NASA at the time. After JFK’s assassination, the Kennedy family used a backchannel diplomatic conduit to the Soviet leadership to communicate their view that the Soviet Union, and its Cuban ally, had been blameless in the assassination and that powerful right-wing forces in the United States had been behind the assassination.

Perhaps JFK’s greatest contribution was one that has received scant notice. In 1961, the Joint Chiefs were pushing for a first strike on the Soviet Union–a decision to initiate nuclear war. JFK refused, walking out of the discussion with the disgusted observation that “We call ourselves the human race.”

In FTR #’s 876, 926 and 1051, we examined the creation of the meme that Oswald had been networking with the Cubans and Soviets in the run-up to the assassination. In particular, Oswald was supposedly meeting with Valery Kostikov, a KGB official in charge of assassinations in the Western Hemisphere.

This created the pretext for blaming JFK’s assassination on the Soviet Union and/or Cuba. There are indications that JFK’s assassination may well have been intended as a pretext for a nuclear first strike on the Soviet Union.

JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters by James W. Douglass; Touchstone Books [SC]; Copyright 2008 by James W. Douglas; ISBN 978-1-4391-9388-4; pp. 242-243.

. . . . As JFK may have recalled from the National Security Council meeting he walked out of in July 1961, the first Net Evaluation Subcommittee report had focused precisely on “a surprise attack in late 1963, preceded by a period of heightened tensions.” Kennedy was a keen reader and listener. In the second preemptive-war report, he may also have noticed the slight but significant discrepancy between its overall time frame, 1963-1968, and the extent of its relatively reassuring conclusion, which covered only 1964 through 1968. . . .

. . . . In his cat-and-mouse questioning of his military chiefs, President Kennedy had built upon the report’s apparently reassuring conclusion in such a way as to discourage preemptive-war ambitions. However, given the “late 1963” focus in the first Net Report that that was the most threatening time for a preemptive strike, Kennedy had little reason to be reassured by a second report that implicitly confirmed that time as the one of maximum danger. The personally fatal fall JFK was about to enter, in late 1963, was the same time his military commanders may have considered their last chance to “win” (in their terms) a preemptive war against the Soviet Union. In terms of their second Net Report to the President, which passed over the perilous meaning of late 1963, the cat-and-mouse game had been reversed. It was the generals who were the cats, and JFK the mouse in their midst.

The explicit assumption of the first Net Report was “a surprise attack in late 1963, preceded by a period of heightened tensions.” The focus of that first-strike scenario corresponded to the Kennedy assassination scenario. When President Kennedy was murdered in late 1963, the Soviet Union had been set up as the major scapegoat in the plot. If the tactic had been successful in scapegoating the Russians for the crime of the century, there is little doubt that it would have resulted in “a period of heightened tensions” between the United States and the Soviet Union.

Those who designed the plot to kill Kennedy were familiar with the inner sanctum of our national security state. Their attempt to scapegoat the Soviets for the President’s murder reflected one side of the secret struggle between JFK and his military leaders over a preemptive strike against the Soviet Union. The assassins’ purpose seems to have encompassed not only killing a President determined to make peace with the enemy, but also using his murder as the impetus for a possible nuclear first strike against that same enemy. . . .

With the GOP and Trump administration openly suppressing voting rights of minorities, African-Americans in particular, the stellar efforts of JFK and the Justice Department in the area of civil rights is striking. JFK’s civil rights policy was exponentially greater than what had preceded him, and much of what followed.

The conclusion of the discussion in FTR #1056 consists of Jim’s discussion of his marvelous, 4-part analysis of JFK’s civil rights policy.


FTR #978 The JFK Assassination and the Vietnam War

Considerable attention has been devoted by the media to a TV documentary by Ken Burns about the Vietnam War. What has not been covered by Burns et al is the fact that JFK’s assassination was the decisive pivot-point of the policy pursued by the U.S. in the conflict.

Excerpting The Guns of November, Part 3 (recorded on 11/15/1983), this program notes how Kennedy’s decision to begin a phased withdrawal from Vietnam was one of the central reasons for his murder.

The central element in the broadcast is professor Peter Dale Scott’s skillful discussion (and excerpting) of relevant National Security Action Memoranda pertaining to Kennedy’s Vietnam policy. The program details Kennedy’s plans to phase out direct U.S. military participation in the conflict.

Presiding over severe dissent from within his own administration, as well as from the military and intelligence establishments, Kennedy initiated this U.S. withdrawal seven weeks before his death. Two days after the assassination, Kennedy’s Vietnam policy was reversed and the course of action was determined for what was to follow. In addition to canceling the troop withdrawal and providing for troop increases, the policy shift resumed the program of covert action against North Vietnam that was to lead to the Gulf of Tonkin incident. That alleged attack on U.S. destroyers (never independently verified and widely believed to be fraudulent) precipitated U.S. military escalation.

The principal documents in question are National Security Action Memoranda #’s 111, 249, 263 and 273.

National Security Memorandum 111, dated two years to the day from JFK’s assassination, resolved a long-standing debate within the Kennedy assassination. That memorandum committed the U.S. to “helping” the South Vietnamese government in the war, pointedly avoiding the language “helping the South Vietnamese win the war.”

Although this might appear to an untrained observer as a minor semantic distinction, it was well understood within the Kennedy administration to define the difference between a limited commitment to aiding the South Vietnamese and an unlimited, open-ended commitment to helping the South Vietnamese win. 

Crafted in June 25 of 1963, NSAM 249 suspended covert operations against North Vietnam pending a review of policy.

In National Security Action Memorandum 263 (10/11/1963), Kennedy scheduled the initial withdrawal of 1,000 military personnel by the end of 1963, as part of a phased withdrawal of all U.S. military personnel.

National Security Action Memorandum 273, which was formulated by LBJ on the Sunday after Kennedy’s murder (the day Jack Ruby killed Oswald) and released two days after that, negated the previous three documents. The troop withdrawal formulated in NSAM 263 was cancelled and troop increases were scheduled. The U.S. was committed to “helping the South Vietnamese win,” pointedly using the language avoided by Kennedy in NSAM 111. Furthermore plans were formulated for the program of covert operations against North Vietnam that resulted in the Gulf of Tonkin Incident and the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution (permitting LBJ to plunge the U.S. into the war).

Covert operations against the North had been suspended  and were resumed in June of 1963 against JFK’s wishes and apparently without his knowledge.

In the roughly 34 years since this program excerpt was recorded, other books have explored how JFK’s assassination reversed U.S. Vietnam policy. One of the best is James Douglass’s “JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters.”

Program Highlights Include:

1.-The intensification in late 1963 of U.S. covert paramilitary operations in Laos.
2.-The intensification in that same period of U.S. covert paramilitary operations against Cambodia.
3.-The Pentagon Papers’ apparently deliberate falsification of U.S. Vietnam policy, maintaining against the historical record that there was continuity of Vietnam policy from JFK’s administration to LBJ’s.
4.-NSAM’s instruction that administration members were to refrain from criticizing American Vietnam policy.


FTR #975 Operation Mind Control, Part 2: Creating the Perfect Killer, Part 2

The program begins by setting forth possible mind control connections to some of the “persons of interest” in America’s major assassinations.

Focusing initially on Oswald handler George De Mohrenschildt, the broadcast notes that:

1.-De Mohrenschildt had apparently been a Nazi spy in World War II, working with North American Abwehr chief Baron Hugo Maydel during the war. De Mohrenschildt had been one of Oswald’s handlers.
2.-De Mohrenschildt had apparently come to have regrets about the killing, and had been writing a book about the conspiracy, according to Dutch author Oltmans.
3.-After giving voice to his regrets and reservations and apparently naming CIA and FBI personnel allegedly involved in the conspiracy, De Mohrenschildt was interned in a psychiatric hospital, where he appears to have been subjected to various forms of mind control.
4.-His daughter Alexandra opined that De Mohrenschildt shot himself to death after receiving a phone call, which she believes contained a hidden cue that triggered his conditioned suicide.

Next, the broadcast highlights some of the aspects of Sirhan Sirhan’s apparent programming at the hands of the intelligence operatives who masterminded the assassination of RFK. As discussed in AFA #9, the forensic evidence disproves the prevailing theory of Sirhan as the killer of Robert Kennedy. In discussing the apparent mind control to which Sirhan was subjected, we note that:

1.-There were fundamentally different analyses of Sirhan from Dr. Bernard Diamond and Dr. Edward Simpson.
2.-Diamond noted that Sirhan was a very easy subject to hypnotize and that he was also a “paranoid schizophrenic.”
3.-Simpson noted that paranoid schizophrenics are virtually impossible to hypnotize.
4.-The available evidence suggests that Sirhan was under mind control and that the focus of that conditioning was to propel him into self-incrimination.
5.-Continuing exploration of the intelligence community’s mind control programs, the broadcast features an interview with a U.S. government assassin, termed by author Walter Bowart “The Patriotic Assassin.”

Having been involved with the laboratory work that spawned the creation of mind controlled assassins, the operative interviewed by Bowart:

1.-Confirmed that the killings of the Kennedy brothers and Martin Luther King were acts of state. He opined that the assassins would have received medals.
2.-Confirmed that the country had experienced a fascist coup, with the country being run by a relative handful of interests, with the military in charge.
3.-Asserted that many operatives in the military and intelligence community worked both for the federal government and for powerful corporations, helping to steer policy in the directions preferred by the corporations and, ultimately, retiring with both federal and corporate retirement benefits.
4.-Confirmed the operational use of mind control in covert operations, as well as aspects of larger military operations.
5.-Maintained that assassins did not need to be subjected to mind control to direct them to perform their missions, but that mind control was necessary to keep them from remembering what they had done.
6.-Asserted that, because critical functions in the high-tech, nuclear state were performed by enlisted personnel, mind control was necessary to keep them from remembering what they had done. The Patriotic Assassin asserted that commissioned officers were dependent on the benefits attendant on that level of service after retirement and maintained that this was sufficient motivation to maintain silence.
7.-Commented that the oft-repeated claim by intelligence agencies that mind control “research” had been discontinued was a veil for the fact that it was fully operational.
8.-Foreshadowed a largely-overlooked and possibly abortive assassination attempt on Jimmy Carter in 1979. Carter had stated that he thought the assassinations of President Kennedy and Martin Luther King had been the result of conspiracies. Shortly afterward, two men were arrested in Los Angeles, after crossing into the country from Mexico to murder Carter. The names of the conspirators were “Ray Lee Harvey” and “Oswaldo Ortiz”–reminiscent of the names of James Earl Ray and Lee Harvey Oswald, the patsies for the murders of JFK and Martin Luther King.


Strategy of Tension in France? “Third Position” Manifestations? Macron Institutes Broad Crackdown

In FTR #957, we noted that “Golden Boy” Emmanuel Macron was Germany’s choice to lead France. Widely hailed as a herald of political and economic enlightenment, Macron has assumed Napoleonic-like power, implementing policies that are deeply inimical to French democracy. Amnesty International recently condemned the government’s abuse of anti-terrorist emergency powers that restrict freedom of movement and rights to peaceful assembly. “Under the cover of the state of emergency, rights to protest have been stripped away with hundreds of activists, environmentalists, and labor rights campaigners unjustifiably banned from participating in protests,” said Marco Perolini, Amnesty International’s researcher on France. In the name of preventing “threats to public order,” the government over a period of 18 months issued 155 decrees banning protests, and 574 measures prohibiting specific individuals from taking part in protests against proposed labor law changes. The latter statistic is particularly notable because Macron plans to issue sweeping decrees to limit the power of unions over working conditions and company firing policies. Such proposals have triggered mass demonstrations and violent clashes with police, in recent months. Macron has been using anti-terror measures taken in response to France’s bloody terror attacks of the last couple of years. It turns out that some of the weaponry used by the terrorists was provided by Claude Hermant (above, right), an apparent agent for the French security forces and a former bodyguard for the fascist National Front, whose defeat at the hands of Macron was bruited about as a “triumph” for enlightenment, democracy, etc. All of the contents of this website as of 12/19/2014–Dave Emory’s 37+ years of research and broadcasting–as well as hours of videotaped lectures are available on a 32GB flash drive. Dave offers his programs and articles for free–your support is very much appreciated.


FTR #960 Update on the High Profile Hacks

As indicated by the title, this broadcast updates the high-profile hacks, at the epicenter of “Russia Gate,” the brutal political fantasy that is at the core of American New Cold War propaganda and that may well lead to World War III.

(Other programs dealing with this subject include: FTR #’s 917, 923, 924, 940, 943, 958, 959.)

As we have noted in many previous broadcasts and posts, cyber attacks are easily disguised. Perpetrating a “cyber false flag” operation is disturbingly easy to do. In a world where the verifiably false and physically impossible “controlled demolition”/Truther nonsense has gained traction, cyber false flag ops are all the more threatening and sinister.

Now, we learn that the CIA’s hacking tools are specifically crafted to mask CIA authorship of the attacks. Most significantly, for our purposes, is the fact that the Agency’s hacking tools are engineered in such a way as to permit the authors of the event to represent themselves as Russian.

This is of paramount significance in evaluating the increasingly neo-McCarthyite New Cold War propaganda about “Russian interference” in the U.S. election.

We then highlight the recent conclusions of the French cyberintelligence chief (Guillaume Poupard) and his warnings about the incredible dangers of cyber-misattribution–the ease with which any random hacker could carrying out a spear-phishing attack, and his bafflement at the NSA’s recent Russian attribution to the spear-phishing French election hacks.

Characteristic of the disingenuous, propagandistic spin of American news media on Putin/Russia/the high profile hacks is a New York Times article that accuses Putin of laying down a propaganda veil to cover for alleged Russian hacking, omitting his remarks that–correctly–note that contemporary technology easily permits the misattribution of cyber espionage/hacking.

We then review the grotesquely dark comic nature of the Macron hacks (supposedly done by “Russian intelligence”.)

Those “Russian government hackers” really need an OPSEC refresher course. The hacked documents in the “Macron hack” not only contained Cyrillic text in the metadata, but also contained the name of the last person to modify the documents. That name, “Roshka Georgiy Petrovichan”, is an employee at Evrika, a large IT company that does work for the Russian government, including the FSB (Russian intelligence.)

Also found in the metadata is the email of the person who uploaded the files to “archive.org”, and that email address, frankmacher1@gmx.de, is registered with a German free webmail provider used previously in 2016 phishing attacks against the CDU in Germany that have been attributed to APT28. It would appear that the “Russian hackers” not only left clues suggesting it was Russian hackers behind the hack, but they decided name names this time–their own names.

In related news, a group of cybersecurity researchers studying the Macron hack has concluded that the modified documents were doctored by someone associated with The Daily Stormer neo-Nazi website and Andrew “the weev” Auernheimer.

Auerenheimer was a guest at Glenn Greenwald and Laura Poitras’s party celebrating their receipt of the Polk award.

“ ‘We strongly believe that the fake offshore documents were created by someone with control of the Daily Stormer server,” said Tord Lundström, a computer forensics investigator at Virtualroad.org.’ . . .”

The public face, site publisher of The Daily Stormer is Andrew Anglin. But look who the site is registered to: Andrew Auernheimer (the site architect) who apparently resided in Ukraine as of the start of this year.

The analysis from the web-security firm Virtualroad.org. indicates that someone associated with the Daily Stormer modified those faked documents–very possibly a highly skilled neo-Nazi hacker like “the weev”.

Based on analysis of how the document dump unfolded, it’s looking like the inexplicably self-incriminating “Russian hackers” may have been a bunch of American neo-Nazis. Imagine that.

In FTR #917, we underscored the genesis of the Seth Rich murder conspiracy theory with WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, who was in touch with Roger Stone during the 2016 campaign. (Stone functioned as the unofficial dirty tricks specialist for the Trump campaign, a role he has played–with relish–since Watergate.

The far-right Seth Rich murder conspiracy theory acquired new gravitas, thanks in part to Kim Schmitz, aka “Kim Dotcom.” We examined Schmitz at length in FTR #812. A synoptic overview of the political and professional orientation of Kim Dotcom is excerpted from that broadcast’s description: “A colleague of Eddie the Friendly Spook [Snowden], Julian Assange and Glenn Greenwald, Kim Schmitz, aka “Kim Dotcom”] espouses the same libertarian/free market ideology underlying the “corporatism” of Benito Mussolini. With an extensive criminal record in Germany and elsewhere, “Der Dotcommandant” has eluded serious punishment for his offenses, including executing the largest insider trading scheme in German history.

Embraced by the file-sharing community and elements of the so-called progressive sector, Dotcom actually allied himself with John Banks and his far-right ACT Party in New Zealand. His embrace of the so-called progressive sector came later and is viewed as having damaged left-leaning parties at the polls. Dotcom is enamored of Nazi memorabilia and owns a rare, author-autographed copy of ‘Mein Kampf.’ . . .”

Program Highlights Include: dissemination of the Seth Rich disinformation by Fox News and Rush Limbaugh, generated by WikiLeaks, Roger Stone and Kim Dotcom; Kim Dotcom’s tweeting of an admittedly phony document about the Seth Rich BS; Dotcom’s refusal to retract his tweet of the phony document; review of the Shadow Brokers non-hack of the NSA; review of the Shadow Brokers use of white supremacist propaganda; review of the role of Crowdstrike’s Dimitri Alperovitch in the dissemination of the “Russia did it” propaganda; review of the role of Ukrainian fascist Alexandra Chalupa in the dissemination of the “Russia did it” propaganda.


FTR #916 Update on Fascism in Ukraine

Continuing coverage of the re-emergence of fascism in Ukraine, this program highlights the Orwellian aspects of governance in Ukraine and the coverage of events there by the world’s media.

Ukraine recently held a nation-wide minute of silence for Symon Petliura (as with other Ukrainian names, the spelling of his name is subject to varying transliteration.) In the immediate post-World War I period, Petliura’s armies butchered some 50,000 Jews. Also stunning, though predictable under the circumstances, is the Poroshenko government’s renaming of streets for Nazi collaborators Stephan Bandera and Roman Shukhevych. This has received scant, and altogether slanted coverage in the West, with Bandera’s well-documented alliance with Hitler being nuanced as “Kremlin propaganda.” It is now illegal in Ukraine to criticize Bandera, Shukhevych, the OUN/B or its military arm the UPA as having collaborated with the Nazis.

The institutionalized masking of the true nature of the Ukrainian government continues apace, with U.N. observers barred from investigating torture by government forces in the civil war that simmers in the East, the branding of reporters covering the war as “terrorists” and the publication of their addresses by a pro-government website, and the publication by “The New York Times” of an apparently fraudulent claim of Russian masking of the presence of Buk missiles in Eastern Ukraine.

Exemplifying the cover-up of the fascist nature of Ukraine is a piece from “The Huffington Post” that dismisses the verifiable Nazi nature of the Azov battalion as–once again–Kremlin propaganda. The source for the disinformation about Azov is Roman Zvarych, the former personal secretary to Jaroslav Stetsko, the head of Ukraine’s World War II collaborationist government.

Program Highlights Include: the Dutch intelligence service’s disclosure that only the Ukrainian army had missiles capable of downing Malaysian Airlines Flight MH-17; the use of the “punisher battalions” (such as Azov) by the Ukrainian government to circumvent Minsk II; the tainting of evidence in the investigation of the downing of MH-17 by the corrupt nature of the SBU (Ukrainian intelligence); the trafficking in stolen art by Valentyn Nalyvaichenko, the former head of the SBU.


FTR #877 Update on the Ukrainian Crisis

Before we turn to continuing analysis of “The Earth Island Boogie” in succeeding programs, we set the stage by updating events in Ukraine. To the surprise of no one, the OUN/B heirs in power in Ukraine have not indicted anyone in the burning alive of 42 pro-Russian demonstrators in Odessa in May of 2014. The Ukrainian “counter-terrorist” forces are inextricably linked with the OUN/B heirs in government and the perpetrators of the act. Failure of governance is taking its toll on the Ukrainian populace, expressed by support for OUN/B-style fascists such as Svoboda in Western Ukraine, support for the political forces grouped around the corrupt former president Victor Yanukovych in the eastern and southern parts of the country and the election to the Odessa city council of a politician who assumed the name of a Star Wars villain. In response to growing criticism of the Ukrainian situation, the EU is implementing an information warfare program directed not only at EU members in Eastern Europe but in Russia as well. A primary theoretical influence on the information warfare the EU is conducting appears to be former Wehrmacht general Wolf Stefan Traugott Graf von Baudissin, who served on Rommel’s staff during World War II. Program Highlights Include: the effect of anti-Russian sentiment expressed by the Maidan coupsters on the population of the Eastern part of the country; the effect of the war waged by the Ukrainian government on public sentiment in the east; the overwhelming probability that hard intelligence on the shootdown of Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 does not support the “Putin/Separatists did it” line; discussion of the long-standing sentiment on the part of Crimeans for re-unification with Russia; von Baudissin’s role in the re-institution of Nazi forces in the postwar German military.


FTR #869 The Assassination of Olof Palme, Part 2

Continuing discussion and analysis from FTR #868, this program underscores the possible role of Swedish and Scandinavian fascists overlapping both WACL and Sapo, the Swedish intelligence service. Involved with escape networks forged to aid the international flight from justice of fascists and Nazis, the principals in these networks exhibited behavior around the time of the Palme killing that is suggestive. Worth noting in this regard is the late Stieg Larsson’s investigation of the Palme killing, which pointed in the direction of some of the same figures examined in the Kruger essay. The program concludes with an examination of the Bofors munitions firm and its corporate links to Third Reich industry and the postwar Bormann capital network, with which it may well be affiliated.


FTR #868: The Assassination of Olof Palme, Part 1

The first of two programs highlighting the unsolved 1986 assassination of Swedish Prime Minister Olof Palme, the broadcast features a 1988 article by the brilliant freelance Danish journalist Henrik Kruger, author of “The Great Heroin Coup: Drugs, Intelligence and International Fascism.” Through this examination of the intersected networks that Kruger has termed (in “The Great Heroin Coup”) “The International Fascista,” we are able to observe the elements of Operation Condor, key individuals and institutions comprising the former World Anti-Communist League, individuals and organizations underlying “the Strategy of Tension” in Italy, as well as the cast of characters that managed the Iran-Contra machinations. Long the focal point of death threats and assassination attempts, Palme had earned the lethal ire of fascists in North and South America, as well as Europe. The failure to solve the killing, despite the passage of almost 30 years and some very strong evidentiary tributaries, underscores the gravitas of the forces that destroyed Palme. Kruger’s article also serves as something of an “in vitro” window into many of the political networks we have examined over the years.


The Assassination of Olof Palme

In our ongoing series of interviews with Peter Levenda, the author of “The Hitler Legacy,” we have highlighted points of discussion relating to WACL, Operation Condor, the Iran/Contra scandal and other elements that might not be familiar to recent/younger readers and listeners. Peter detailed his hair-raising visit to Colonia Dignidad in FTR #839. While going through some boxes in storage, we came across an old essay by the brilliant Danish journalist Henrik Kruger, author of “The Great Heroin Coup,” analyzing the unsolved 1986 assassination of Swedish prime minister Olof Palme. We present that article here, in order to familiarize younger readers and listeners with individuals and institutions we haven’t covered in decades. All of the contents of this website as of 12/19/2014–Dave Emory’s 35+ years of research and broadcasting–as well as hours of videotaped lectures are available on a 32GB flash drive. Dave offers his programs and articles for free–your support is very much appreciated.