Posted on 05/25/2018 7:57:19 PM PDT by bitt
The U.S. government once wanted to plan false flag attacks with Soviet aircraft to justify war with the USSR or its allies, newly declassified documents surrounding the assassination of President John F. Kennedy show.
In a three-page memo, members of the National Security Council wrote, "There is a possibility that such aircraft could be used in a deception operation designed to confuse enemy planes in the air, to launch a surprise attack against enemy installations or in a provocation operation in which Soviet aircraft would appear to attack US or friendly installations to provide an excuse for U.S. intervention."
The memo shows that the department, along with the CIA, considered buying Soviet aircraft to stage the attacks, even getting estimates from the Air Force on how long it would take and how much it would cost to produce the planes domestically and covertly. Costs ranged from $3.5 million to $44 million per plane, depending on the model, most taking several months to build.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.com ...
What troubles me is these fake planes would be piloted by Americans to be killed as our defensive aircraft shot them down. This plan is right out of a Hollywood script with its typical plot holes.
I remember Ivanka hired Jamie Gorelick early on in the new Trump administration.
Agreed. The JFK myth astonishingly continues and if it is that bad here on FR where we’re supposed to be aware of Leftist corruption and decadence, what does that say about the rest of country’s fascination with the decrepit “Camelot” myth?
Sounds about right. I was a little kid in kindergarten and remember exactly where I was but CIA Bush seems to have forgotten. Deep State is an old organization.
Hey man, Laz nails everything....and most everyone.
The Kennedys: The most destructive force ever unleashed on this country.
once wanted to plan
... and when the USSR was no more and GW Bush had Republicans controlling the entire government, there was zero attempt to liberate Cuba. Better to let Cubans rot under communism than break an agreement with a Cold War enemy that no longer existed.
I don’t know much about her.
I know there is a pro-life PAC called the Susan B. Anthony list so I thought she was pro-life. But her lib fans claim that’s not true and that pro-lifers are appropriating her.
Put me on your ping list or I shall contact the mods and other assorted powers that be post haste!
Welcome aboard!
In better times, even putting together those ideas on paper would lead to hangings.
My co-author on “Patriot’s History of the Modern World” has a manuscript he’s sending in with a doctor who has gone through JFK’s medical records with a fine tooth comb and has some good revelations. Bottom line: this guy was in pain, all the time, every day.
I don’t doubt it. Had the family and the Dems (and with a willing media) not covered it up, the health stuff alone should never have allowed him to get to the White House. I imagine had he not been assassinated, he probably wouldn’t have lived much longer because of the drugs. Dollars to doughnuts, he was probably riddled with STDs, too.
Eh, by today’s standards, he was conservative, at least. And I’m no fan of JFK either, especially regarding his womanizing (which even extended to people who were confirmed national security risks), his screwing up the Bay of Pigs, not to mention his not ensuring that Cuba remained free during the Cuban Missile Crisis, among other stuff. At least he actually TRIED to fight off Communism (heck, even backed up Joe McCarthy during the Red Scare, and most Democrats during that time tried to sabotage his career. If JFK was willing to aid Joe McCarthy and give him a shot at stopping Communism, I’m pretty sure he definitely would have gone against McGovern), which is still commendable especially when his brothers didn’t even bother to try fighting Communism, and in the case of Ted, actually AIDED the Soviets and requested their involvement in interfering with the presidential elections.
Besides, I’m pretty doubtful that JFK would have backed Roe v. Wade, let alone Hillary Clinton and Obama, even with all of his faults. Let me point out that Martin Sheen was arguably even MORE of a leftist than JFK ever was, certainly far more open about being left-wing, yet he absolutely refused to back Barack Obama during the 2008 and possibly the 2012 elections, and the reason why he broke ranks with the Democrats during that time is precisely BECAUSE Obama supported abortion (as Martin Sheen was Catholic, maybe not the world’s best Catholic, but still Catholic, and one part of Catholic Doctrine is that they NEVER support at the very least abortion). If even the likes of Martin Sheen refused to back Barack Obama due to his support of abortion, it’s pretty clear JFK would not support it either. Now, Ted Kennedy, that’s a different story altogether.
And there’s still some Democrat politicians who actually do sincerely adhere to pro-life measures (I can even name one particular Democrat of that stripe: Randall Terry).
Eh, to be honest, I have quite a bit of a degree of respect for Susan B. Anthony, since at least she made clear she holds abortion in utter disgust, which is much better than the feminists of today who if anything genuinely love it. And to be fair, she kind of has a point regarding a law not having the desired effect. Look at Prohibition. That was started to outlaw any drinking of alcohol. Even though that was the desired outcome, all prohibition did was make the situation even WORSE, actually led to the increase of organized crime. Now, if there’s a way to create a law that is enforceable and actually ENSURES there isn’t a buildup of organized crime or something similar, then we’re talking. Can’t say I agree with her on the Women’s Bible, though, OR with Stanton, for that matter.
Yeah, Vladimir Lenin advocated free trade to destroy Capitalism, so I’m doubtful that would make it conservative.
Yeah, no kidding. I’m not sure how we’d even get the Soviet aircraft anyhow, let alone get Americans to willingly be put in a meat grinder to instigate nuclear war. Even in the 1950s, let alone the 1960s, we had nuclear superiority (the missile gap was a lie), so technically it wouldn’t have even been a war. Plus, why even NEED to do a false flag operation, anyways? We already knew the Soviets were bad news, and we already knew about its atrocious actions and overall trying to subvert the world in anarchy and the reign of terror. I see zero reason to even need a false flag operation to do so. Actually, if anything, if I wanted a nuclear strike, I’d get one, not need to do a lot of convincing via Kabuki theater.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
