Posted on 04/18/2020 3:52:16 AM PDT by Kaslin
“Her (Ethel Kennedy’s) family says she’s been a fan of Guevara for years — and makes no apology about it. “My mom loves Che Guevara. Her dog is named Che,” her son, Robert Kennedy Jr., told The Post.” (NY Post 4/15.)
In fact, your humble servant was on this story before the Johnny-come-lately New York Post, right after alert columnist/blogger Sarah Gonzales on April 13th tweeted a picture of Mariah Cuomo and her grandmother Ethel Kennedy with a pic of Che Guevara peeping in the background.
“Why does Andrew Cuomo’s daughter have a framed photograph of communist murderer he Guevara in her living room?! If not her house, who is the Che worshipper of the family? Inquiring minds want to know.”
Your humble servant linked the tweet and posted to the effect that the home’s décor hinted at grandma Ethel’s place. She’s Robert F. Kennedy’s widow, hence JFK’s sister-in-law. This makes the Che Guevara family presence all the more “fascinating,” considering that these Kennedys were America’s twin “commanders-in-chief” during the Cuban Missile Crisis, and during the infamous Bay of Pigs treachery which took place 59 years ago this very week.
Another tip-off hinting at Che as grandma Ethel’s home decoration is this tribute to her on her 92d birthday from son RFK, Jr in People magazine: “She combined skepticism towards orthodoxy, irreverence towards authority, she admired physical and moral courage and surrounded herself with war heroes, and dissidents both political and clerical…she tried to imbue us with a love for justice and an indignation when our country falls short of its ideals.”
Everyone even half-way familiar with Liberal-speak will immediately recognize that–given the historical record– the above personality traits are a sure bet that the affected liberal will worship a cowardly, sadistic, racist, war-mongering, mass-murdering imbecile, whose lifelong craving was to incinerate them.
And sure enough. Even more “fascinating” was yet another picture of Che Guevara detected by your humble servant at the famous Kennedy family estate named Hickory Hill in McLean, Virginia. According to Pinterest the picture of the terrorist mass-murderer whose lifelong craving was to nuke the U.S. was (is) located in the late Robert F. Kennedy’s very home office!
More “fascinating” still the Hickory Hill office pic is the original uncropped version. The famous Che Guevara pic seen on t-shirts and posters was a cropped version of one taken by Alberto Korda in March 1960. Korda’s real name was Alberto Díaz Gutiérrez and he was a KGB agent, as revealed by Soviet-Bloc intelligence defector Ion Pacepa. The cropped picture was spread throughout the world by I. Lavretsky and Giangicomo Fetrinelli, respectively full-time and part-time KGB agents, as also revealed by Pacepa.
Hence, every person you see sporting that t-shirt or poster is a genuine “Russian colluder!”-- though probably unwittingly in about 80 per cent of the cases, when they qualify merely as morons.
Several fascinating questions now arise: Was that Che pic present in RFK’s office in the early 1960’s, when he was head of the famous Operation Mongoose, purportedly a Kennedy/CIA plan to assassinate Fidel Castro and overthrow his regime? If so, there’s no indication the Che pic was used as a dartboard, as it sits alongside what are (presumably) revered Kennedy family members.
CNN (honored as the first western press agency graciously granted a Havana bureau back in 1997) is a particularly persistent publicist of these assassination attempts.
“Survivor Turns 90,” gushed CNN’s perky Patrick Oppmann from Havana back in 2016. “More people have tried to murder the world’s most famous socialist than any man alive, according to the 2006 British documentary “638 Ways to Kill Castro.”
Got it? CNN painted the poor old boy as a victim. And gosh? What in the world, CNN implies, would cause anyone to wish harm upon this inoffensive healthcare provider? After all, his only offense was to dispossess mobsters and provide free and fabulous healthcare and education to his formerly wretched and exploited countrymen.
This pretty much sums up the CNN story. The primary source for the British documentary — and for CNN’s report — by the way, is Fabian Escalante, one of Castro’s oldest and most trusted KGB-trained intelligence officers.
Regarding all those dastardly CIA assassination attempts against Castro so breathlessly reported by Escalante and eagerly transcribed by CNN’s intrepid gumshoes:
In the early ’60s, the late E. Howard Hunt was head of the political division of the CIA’s “Cuba Project.” “So far as I have been able to determine,” Hunt clarified in his book “Give Us This Day,” “no coherent plan was ever developed within the CIA to assassinate Castro, though it was the heart’s desire of many exile groups.” Interestingly, Hunt stressed that killing Castro was his own recommendation. But he couldn’t get any serious takers within the (notoriously and historically liberal) agency higher-ups.
This may have been because there were so many Castro supporters in the CIA at the time. Maybe it was hard to get their hearts and minds wholeheartedly into such a wrenching flip-flop. Consider these quotes from CIA officials:
“Me and my staff were all Fidelistas.” (Robert Reynolds, the CIA’s Caribbean Desk chief from 1957 to 1960.)
“Everyone in the CIA and everyone at State was pro-Castro, except [Republican] ambassador Earl Smith.” (Robert Weicha, CIA operative in Santiago Cuba.)
Even the U.S. Senate’s liberal Church Committee, chaired by Sen. Frank Church in the 1970s, claimed that the assassination stories were largely mythologized:
‘In August 1975, Fidel Castro gave Senator George McGovern a list of 24 alleged attempts to assassinate him in which Castro claimed the CIA had been involved. … The Committee has found no evidence that the CIA was involved in the attempts on Castro’s life enumerated in the allegations that Castro gave to Senator McGovern.“
On the other hand, we have CNN’s Havana bureau earning its keep by transcribing reports of those nefarious CIA assassination plots, as reported to them by Fabian Escalante — one of Castro’s oldest and most trusted KGB-trained intelligence officers.
There was a day when Americans laughed at any U.S. network that regarded on-duty communist intelligence officers as trustworthy news sources.
Now, if the man (Robert F. Kennedy) tasked with overthrowing the Castro regime kept a cherished picture of Che Guevara in his home office, are there any more questions why Fidel Castro died peacefully in bed at 90?
LOL!! Thanks....my husband finally Believed me!
Yes, it was real
So John Kennedy’s right-wing policies (tax cuts, facing down Soviets in Cuba and Berlin) and Robert Kennedy’s attachment to Joe McCarthy might have been residual adolescent rebellion against Ethel’s communism. No wonder Teddy Kennedy turned out to be a worthless drunk fat pig who couldn’t keep his hands off the girls. All this conflict just drove him off a bridge.
Ethel is the widow of RFK.
JFK supported the 1963 military coup in Guatamala, ending Che’s dream there.
Unfortunately, Ethel raised the 11 kids ... which is why they are all useless.
Claims to his being “right wing” are absurd. Tax rates were already confiscatory and counterproductive. Khrushchev ate his lunch in the “showdown” and JFK left the Cuban Freedom Fighters to die on the beach. Reagan rightly argued he was a left-winger at the time.
The whole family has been a cancer on the nation from the beginning.
“A rising tide lifts all boats”. Tax rates under Eisenhower were confiscatory and counterproductive, and he cut them, having run on the promise of cutting taxes. The Cuban “freedom fighters” had a dickens of a time convincing the Cuban people to get behind them, because they were exclusively Batiste die-hards, and were recognized as such on their home stomping grounds, even if they did dupe the CIA into backing them. There was a time that Castro was regarded by some as a “freedom fighter”. Beware of lofty labels with no substance. JFK faced down the Soviets at Checkpoint Charlie and on the eve of Armageddon over Cuba.
Was he “right-wing”? In some aspects, yes. Other aspects, no. He would not recognize the modern-day Democrat Party. Neither would Bobby, who was still defending McCarthy in the 1960s, when he suddenly discovered he was left-wing just in time to coopt the anti-war movement from Gene McCarthy (no relation to Joe). Fortuitously, an Arab terrorist spared the country from another Kennedy presidency.
“The whole family has been a cancer on the nation from the beginning.”
Amen. Quite aside from my narrow point regarding Ethyl and the boys.
“Ethel is the widow of RFK.”
V-8 head slap. All the more wonder. How did McCarthy’s gofer end up marrying and siring eleven kids with a Che-loving commie? That family is seriesly warped. A pox on the lot of them.
Ike was not a Conservative. Given the mess he left and the disastrous wipe-out of the Republicans in 1958 on his watch, he could not have inflicted nearly as much damage had Truman persuaded him to run as a Democrat.
Our government was infested by the 1950s with Communist/leftist agents and sympathizers. As Humberto Fontova pointed out, about the only person who was anti-Castro was the then-Ambassador, Earl Smith. Batista, of course, was no prize, but compared to what followed...
As I said, I have little regard for JFK. He stole the 1960 election and put the whole nation on the wrong course. Nixon actually won, and he would not have kow-towed to the Soviets. He knew Khrushchev was a blustering phony and could handle him. He would have taken out Castro early on (by 1969, it was too late). JFK was so far out of his element that he was as bad as, if not worse than, Emperor Zero. He had most of the media covering for his escapades and incompetence (and they still do today). He was a sex degenerate and addicted to narcotics, both of which gravely jeopardized his ability to serve.
I wonder if her cat is named Manson?
Worked in a hospital with a Neurologist...
The dude was a Commie..Loved Che....
Told a friend of mine...a Doc..about this Doc. He was not believing it..
I told him to check out his front license plate...
It was a Che plate..and had a picture of Che in his conference room.
At this point, what difference does it make. Nixon was no conservative, either. On the contrary, he was an admitted Keynesian, with the likes of John Ehrlichman running his domestic policy and implementing affirmative action in government hiring. He was only concerned with foreign policy, and his accomplishments included losing the war in Vietnam, and detente with Russia and China.
None of the ruling class in the 1960s and ‘50s were paragons of conservative virtue. I am not interested in branding the Kennedeys as such, either. The lot of them were ciphers at best, and I’m identifying them as such. It’s actually reassuring that Teddy was a knee-jerk liberal, in addition to being a murderer, a fat drunken pig, a traitor and a lecher.
Conservatism as we understand it today began politically with the Reagan presidency, and intellectually with Wm. F. Buckley Jr. launching Firing Line and the National Review, or earlier with Milton Friedman.
Actually, we had “Conservatism” (or at least responsible governance) before FDR (and Hoover, to a degree). President Harding, who unlike most leftist historians, I personally rank as being one of our best Presidents (for one reason, he cut taxes and government and spurred on the 1920s economic boom and ended the Wilsonian Recession in a year). Historians hate him because he didn’t raise taxes and expand government, their high holy cause.
Eisenhower, I rank poorly, because he should’ve taken a premier opportunity to roll back over 2 decades of ludicrously expansionist government and weeded out the leftists and Communist sympathizers infesting it. Joe McCarthy turned out to not only be right, but underestimated the level of infiltration of the culture. The Soviet Venona records confirmed he was right.
With respect to Nixon, I believe he would’ve been a far superior President had he served as he should’ve from 1961-1969. He would’ve dealt with Cuba, I think he would’ve pursued a more decisive approach in Southeast Asia and not have been cowed by the Soviets. Add to that, a more modest approach on Civil Rights that would’ve rightly given the Republicans the credit they deserved, which would’ve resulted in drastically different voting patterns by Blacks.
Nixon assuming office by 1969 was already too late for dealing with these issues. JFK/LBJ had left such a horrible mess, nobody coming in by then would’ve been able to properly deal with it. Had it been Humphrey, he, too, would’ve been a failure and likely run out after a single term. Of course, in that case, you would’ve had Reagan elected in 1972, and likely with or near-Republican majorities.
To comment on another point you made, Robert Kennedy, had he not been assassinated, it’s still unlikely he would’ve been the nominee in 1968. Humphrey might’ve thrown him a bone and made him VP, but he’d have been dragged down by Humphrey’s failures as President. RFK might’ve been the nominee in 1972, but he would’ve been obliterated by Reagan. There was a tv debate between the two of them and RFK looked like a deer caught in the headlights debating a superior and better-informed Reagan.
When Reagan was elected, he couldn’t get more than 192 in the House (fewer than we have now after 2018). Why might it have been different in an alternate 1972?
Sad, that a woman who pushed out like 800 White babies could be such a deluded commie. Che would raped your daughters Ethel and used your sons blood instead of milk on his corn flakes.
That’s...cold.
For starters, 1970 would’ve been a landslide year for the GOP against Humphrey, and would’ve put the GOP in the catbird’s seat with redistricting. Add to that, there was the possibility that a number of Conservative Democrats would’ve either voted for a GOP Speaker or switched parties outright. I recall reading Republicans and some Conservative Democrats proposing a coalition Speaker led by Joe D. Waggonner of Louisiana.
As it was, the GOP came close to, or outright moved (however briefly) to majority status in 1972 in some places, and Watergate would set it back more than 20 years or longer.
It’s also true. Che’d have lined the whole family up against the wall after he raped and tortured them for kicks, even as devout supporters.
“...Sad, that a woman who ...”
What’s even sadder is that that family was ever anywhere NEAR the levers of power in this country, and that they deluded enough fools into voting for them over and over again.
Doesn’t reflect well on folks at all...
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.