Helliwell's cat's paw

[Cliff Varnell]

Thanks - I happen to think this was probably what happened. A few years ago I looked at the Z film with this in mind and agreed that JFK looks practically frozen as he reaches towards his throat, and he makes no effort to duck. Jackie's movements suggest that she is confused, as she makes no effort to maneuver him to a safer position. If she had heard a shot and seen him like that she would have reacted differently. She knew something was up, but clearly did not suspect he had been shot. I don't buy the explanation that his back support corset restricted his movement so much he couldn't move or be pushed to a safer position.

Assuming that it was a high tech weapon, what does it suggest about the organizers of the ambush? Certainly not maverick mafiosi or right wing nut jobs acting on their own. It suggests at least the collusion of military operatives.

Or possible "rogue" CIA officers like David Sanchez Morales?

Was Morales well-enough connected to have access to those weapons? You know, to give to the hit men to use?

--Tommy

In a word, yes.

David Morales. The sharpest claw on the paw.

[Cliff Varnell]

Peter Dale Scott, "Overview: The CIA, the Drug Trade, and Oswald in Mexico"

http://www.history-matters.com/pds/dp3_overview.htm

<quote on>

In an open society, all of the Oswald facts and allegations would have reached the Warren Commission, whether or not they were true. The absence of objective evaluation and review allowed these facts and allegations about Oswald in Mexico to become enabling instruments of power: first to create the Warren Commission, and later to curtail its investigations.

The power of these covert agencies to control US politics through the manipulation of truth is only one more reason for us to refer to them as kryptocracies, agencies of government which (in contrast to conventional bureaucracies) operate secretly and are not accountable for their actions and procedures. At this stage, I shall refer to kryptocracies in the plural, to make it clear that I am not talking about some single omnipotent Secret Team. On the contrary, we shall see in Part Three of this book that different kryptocracies or intelligence agencies, and even different branches within these agencies, were in conflict with each other over the matters raised by Lee Harvey O/swald.

The point is rather that, in major powers like the United States, bureaucratic behavior, which in principle is publicly recorded and accountable, is in some respects determined by the kryptocratic behavior at its center, which is not. As we shall see in the following pages, one of the important sources of the kryptocracies' power is their ability to falsify their own records, without fear of outside correction.

But even if we concede the autonomy of kryptocracies, how important are they in determining the course of history? I believe the evidence in this book will justify a limited answer to this question: the kryptocracies, and the CIA in particular, were powerful enough to control and defuse a possible crisis in U.S. political legitimacy. They did so by reinforcing an unsustainable claim: Oswald killed the President, and he acted alone.

Kryptocracies and the Kryptonomy (International Drug Traffic)

But the power of kryptocracies to influence history became even greater when, as we shall see, they acted in concert with forces allied to the powerful international drug traffic. Most people are unaware of the size of this unrecorded drug economy. In 1981 U.S. Government analysts estimated that the annual sales volume of illicit drugs exceeded half a trillion dollars.[4] The total of legitimate, recorded international trade, in all commodities, was in the order of one trillion dollars, or twice the estimate for drugs. While estimates of the unrecorded drug traffic remain questionable, it is obvious that this traffic is large enough to be a major factor in both the economic and political considerations of government, even while it does not form part of recorded economic statistics.

For this reason, I propose the word kryptonomy, to name this unrecorded, illicit, but nonetheless important shadow economy. It is no accident that kryptocracies and the kryptonomy work in concert. The kryptonomy is so large, and so powerful, that governments have no choice but to plan to manage it, even before attempting to suppress it.

<quote off, emphasis in the original>

Edited November 13, 2015 by Cliff Varnell

[David Andrews]

Delete

Edited November 13, 2015 by David Andrews

[Cliff Varnell]

On September 15, 1959, Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev landed in Washington DC on the first stop of a two week tour
of the States.

The next day he showed up at W. Averell Harriman's pad in Manhattan.

From Spanning the Century The Life of W. Averell Harriman, by Rudy Abramson, pg. 575

<quote on>

In his second-floor drawing room, Harriman gathered leaders from mining, manufacturing, oil, chemicals, banking,
and insurance industries, including John D. Rockefeller III; General David Sarnoff, chairman of RCA; Frank Pace,
chairman of General Dynamics Corporation; W. Alton Jones, chairman of Cities Service Corporation; and John J. McCloy,
chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank. By his estimate, scribbled on a yellow legal pad before Khrushchev arrived, they
represented assets of some $38 billion. Among them, as witnesses to history, were a few men of ordinary means,
former ambassadors, educators, and, notably, Rockefeller Foundation president Dean Rusk, and Harvard economist
John Kenneth Galbraith, the latter having invited himself as a "representative of the proletariat."

Surround by Picassos and Derains, their voices muffled by Persian carpets, the capitalist Titans greeted the Communist
chieftain one by one, then sat in a semi-circle savoring caviar and sipping champagne and New York wine as Averell
conducted his exposition of capitalism, war profits, and American politics. No one present, nor any of their friends,
he and the others assured the guest of honor, favored world tensions. The assembled war profiteers, said the host, were
men who'd champion disarmament the moment it became safe for the United States. There was not a hint, however, that
mingling with the millionaires did anything except reinforce Khrushchev's belief that he was then in the presence of the
men who controlled America far more than Eisenhower and the members of Congress he had met in Washington.

One testimonial to free enterprise followed another. And when the Soviet leader reasserted his stubborn belief that the
men present composed the country's ruling circle, Galbraith later tattled, "Somebody demurred, but in perfunctory fashion."
After it was over, Harriman insisted that the Soviet leader had gained insights of "real importance."

<quote off>

The Military-Industrial-Complex star chamber '59.

[Cliff Varnell]

Larry Hancock's Nexus, pg 36?

<quote on, emphasis in original)

A June 29, 1975 CIA memorandum has also been located which documents the SOD/CIA relationship and confirms that no
written records were kept; management was by verbal instruction and "human continuity."

<quote off>

Larry,

Wouldn't that be the operative definition of "off the books operations" -- "no written records were kept, management was by verbal instruction,

and '"human continuity"'?

How did the CIA fund its off the books operations?

The drug trade.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/deep-events-and-the-cia-s-global-drug-connection/10095

Edited November 14, 2015 by Cliff Varnell

[Larry Hancock]

Actually the fact that it was assigned a crypt indicates that it was an approved project and on the books from that standpoint. That means its funded out of regular CIA funds, budgeted within the Technical Services Division. Tech Services supported projects major project ranging from spy satellites to silent helicopters to specialty bugging and radio intercept gear the bio and drug projects under MK/NAOMI and MK/ULTRA. The CIA team that went into bug and steal codebooks from the Chinese embassy in Havana were Tech Services types...probably supported by guys from Staff D. Funds were dispersed to MK/NAOMI by project and well accounted for - actually its financing is one of the main reason we even know it even exists. If you want to find the real projects inside the CIA, even the assassination ones, you follow the money as usual and somebody has to sign off in a budget distribution. Those financial records and we have numbers showing MK/NAOMI was running about 500 million annually from 1950 to a high in the mid 60's. Of course we only have those records because Carter's Sec of Defense ordered an inquired into all CIA projects supported by the military. If you want the dirt on CIA, look for State and DOD revelations.

The real issue gets to be documentation. Normally field operations are run day to day with soft files, held locally as working references, and then with normal business and operational memos and reports back to headquarters. In this case the operations at the field level, at Fort Detrick, were ordered to be verbal only. We know of other instances, in particular assassinations projects, where the same was true. It doesn't mean its financially off the books, its just so volatile that its verbal only with no paper trial for the actual day to day operations. That protects individuals and also allows Congressional testimony or even IG internal investigations to be manipulated at will with no paper trail to worry about.

Gottlieb was perfectly willing to talk to Alberelli about MI/NAOMI but we have no way of corroborating what he said.

If you want a real lesson in off the books funding....take a look at Iran-Contra.....or the earliest involvement in Afghanistan against the Russians - that's when the CIA Director tells folks outside the Agency how to do things Congress won't fund and mentors them on where to go look for money.

Edited November 14, 2015 by Larry Hancock

[Cliff Varnell]

Actually the fact that it was assigned a crypt indicates that it was an approved project and on the books from that standpoint. That means its funded out of regular CIA funds, budgeted within the Technical Services Division. Tech Services supported projects major project ranging from spy satellites to silent helicopters to specialty bugging and radio intercept gear the bio and drug projects under MK/NAOMI and MK/ULTRA.

And MK/DELTA. I'm wondering how much of the "exotic" projects attributed to MK/NAOMI were actually MK/DELTA.

The CIA team that went into bug and steal codebooks from the Chinese embassy in Havana were Tech Services types...probably supported by guys from Staff D. Funds were dispersed to MK/NAOMI by project and well accounted for - actually its financing is one of the main reason we even know it even exists.

How "well accounted for" other than annual budget totals?

I'm curious how "granular" is the extant financial record of MK/NAOMI.

If you want to find the real projects inside the CIA, even the assassination ones, you follow the money as usual and somebody has to sign off in a budget distribution.

Would this account for an operator like John Michael Dunn (although your mileage with William Corson's take may vary):

Joseph Trento's Secret History of the CIA, pg 335:

<quote on, emphasis added>

The president had begun to suspect that not everyone on his national security team was loyal. As Corson put it, “Kenny O’Donnell (JFK’s appointments secretary) was convinced that McGeorge Bundy, the national security advisor, was taking orders from Ambassador Averell Harriman and not the president. He was especially worried about Michael Forrestal, a young man on the White House staff who handled liaison on Vietnam with Harriman.”

At the heart of the murders was the sudden and strange recall of Sagon Station Chief Jocko Richardson and his replacement by a no-name team barely known to history. The key member was a Special Operations Army officer, John Michael Dunn, who took his orders, not from the normal CIA hierarchy but from Harriman and Forrestal.

According to Corson, “John Michael Dunn was known to be in touch with the coup plotters,” although Dunn’s role has never been made public. Corson believes that Richardson was removed so that Dunn, assigned to Ambassador Lodge for “special operations,” could act without hindrance.

<quote off>

At Ft. Detrick the CIA operation was disguised as a military operation.

The Church Comm. asked Senseney who the Staff Support Group was trying to deceive with a fake name -- he didn't know.

The Staff Support Group appears to have operated outside the "normal military hierarchy" since it was actually CIA.

Those financial records and we have numbers showing MK/NAOMI was running about 500 million annually from 1950 to a high in the mid 60's. Of course we only have those records because Carter's Sec of Defense ordered an inquired into all CIA projects supported by the military. If you want the dirt on CIA, look for State and DOD revelations.

The real issue gets to be documentation. Normally field operations are run day to day with soft files, held locally as working references, and then with normal business and operational memos and reports back to headquarters. In this case the operations at the field level, at Fort Detrick, were ordered to be verbal only. We know of other instances, in particular assassinations projects, where the same was true.

Interesting.

The tradecraft employed for particular assassination projects was maintained for 2 decades by an entire project, MK/NAOMI.

Human continuity, indeed.

It doesn't mean its financially off the books, its just so volatile that its verbal only with no paper trial for the actual day to day operations. That protects individuals and also allows Congressional testimony or even IG internal investigations to be manipulated at will with no paper trail to worry about.

Gottlieb was perfectly willing to talk to Alberelli about MI/NAOMI but we have no way of corroborating what he said.

There is a key point in Senseney's testimony when he (it seems to me) starts to name off the projects on-going at Ft. Detrick, then he's cut off.

<quote on, emphasis added>

Q: Did you describe for us in the previous executive session some of the exotic devices that you developed and displayed

to your customers.[sic]

Senseney: Well, I was project engineer for the M-1, so all of the missile type, the dart type or this would have been

from my part. I know of others but they came under the other four project engineers, they were road depositors--

Q: What are road depositors?

Senseney: A bacteriological aerosol you put on roads, on railroad tracks and things like that.

Q: Who did you give that to?

Senseney: It was not given to anyone. The Army asked for it. It was type--classified for the Army, period.

<quote off>

He started to rattle off what the other four projects were but was interrupted.

I wonder if these other projects had to do with MK/DELTA. According to Senseney MK/NAOMI at Ft. Detrick didn't have "day to day" operations -- they only showed up every 6 weeks or so to pick up their dart weapons.

If you want a real lesson in off the books funding....take a look at Iran-Contra.....or the earliest involvement in Afghanistan against the Russians - that's when the CIA Director tells folks outside the Agency how to do things Congress won't fund and mentors them on where to go look for money.

Iran! Contra! Two discrete, treasonous scandals covered up by combining them.

Best not to get me started on that one...

[Larry Hancock]

Cliff, I don't really know enough to comment on your question about Dunn. I don't find him on a list of CIA station chiefs nor do I see his name associated with CIA covert or overt military ops. His obituary states that "from 1963 until 1965, he was personal assistant to Ambassador Henry Cabot Lodge in South Vietnam and executive secretary at the American Embassy in Saigon, now Ho Chi Minh City" .

Certainly its clear, even in Richardson's own obit that Lodge appears to have maneuvered to get him out of his position in October, essentially creating a station vacuum as the coup jelled. Assuming that Dunn was playing a liaison role with the Vietnamese Generals - which would have certainly gone along with his assignment to Lodge - no doubt he could have pushed for the coup or even for murdering the brothers. Looks to me like that would be a Lodge play more than anything else - and games about moving station chiefs in and out over internal State/CIA battles are legendary. State had tried that with Hecksher in Laos but in that one CIA held firm.

Sorry, not able to shed much light on it.

[Cliff Varnell]

. If you want the dirt on CIA, look for State and DOD revelations.

I'll take "State Dept. Dirt on Henry Hecksher" for $2,000, Larry.

After his contentious tour in Laos (State wanted him out; CIA wanted him to stay; he stayed) Hecksher was given "a special, unspecified role in 'cross border' operations out of Thailand" (Shadow Warfare, Hancock/Wexler, pg 138).

The Thai border police were major opium smugglers.

Hecksher's rabid anti-Communism ran counter to Ike's Amb to Laos Horace H. Smith's neutrality stance (ibid).

Did commie-hating Hecksher moonlight in the drug trade?

Edited November 17, 2015 by Cliff Varnell

[Larry Hancock]

I have little doubt that Hecksher would have done whatever he felt necessary to help hold the Nationalist Chinese affiliated quasi military units together and move them into

Laos as military leverage for the right wing opposition to the neutralist government. My guess is that would have primarily involved setting up connections so they could move

drugs at increased quantities through the Nationalist Chinese airlines - not just commercial but military, run as usual by dirty senior officers. I trace that activity over some three

decades in Shadow Warfare and its pretty clear that other CIA officers on Taiwan were involved with either facilitating or actively looking the other way in regard to that drug channel.

[Cliff Varnell]

I have little doubt that Hecksher would have done whatever he felt necessary to help hold the Nationalist Chinese affiliated quasi military units together and move them into

Laos as military leverage for the right wing opposition to the neutralist government. My guess is that would have primarily involved setting up connections so they could move

drugs at increased quantities through the Nationalist Chinese airlines - not just commercial but military, run as usual by dirty senior officers. I trace that activity over some three

decades in Shadow Warfare and its pretty clear that other CIA officers on Taiwan were involved with either facilitating or actively looking the other way in regard to that drug channel.

And who was a driving force behind procuring US gov't subsidies for the erstwhile Flying Tigers?

Paul Helliwell.

Alfred W. McCoy's The Politics of Heroin, pg 167:

<quote on>

As Communist forces were sweeping south in May 1949 and their victory seemed certain, General Claire Chennault,

commander of the famed Flying Tigers in China during World War II, came to Washington to lobby for an infusion of

funds for the dying Nationalist regime. With "a small force of stout men who know the terrain" and ample air support,

Americans could help the Nationalists and their tough provincial warlords dig in along China's western borderlands

from the deserts of the north to the mountains of Yunnan in the south. Although the State Department dismissed

Chennault's plan as "impractical," he found a persuasive advocate in [Paul] Helliwell. With Helliwell's endorsement,

General Chennault met [Office of Policy Coordination] director Frank Wisner at the Hotel Washington and convinced him

to support the scheme by subsidizing Civil Air Transport (CAT), the general's own China airline that was then lurching

toward bankruptcy. With Helliwell's strong endorsement, the OPC agreed to an annual subsidy of some $1 million for

CAT's China operations...

<quote off>

[Cliff Varnell]

Actually the fact that it was assigned a crypt indicates that it was an approved project and on the books from that standpoint. That means its funded out of regular CIA funds, budgeted within the Technical Services Division. Tech Services supported projects major project ranging from spy satellites to silent helicopters to specialty bugging and radio intercept gear the bio and drug projects under MK/NAOMI and MK/ULTRA. The CIA team that went into bug and steal codebooks from the Chinese embassy in Havana were Tech Services types...probably supported by guys from Staff D. Funds were dispersed to MK/NAOMI by project and well accounted for - actually its financing is one of the main reason we even know it even exists. If you want to find the real projects inside the CIA, even the assassination ones, you follow the money as usual and somebody has to sign off in a budget distribution. Those financial records and we have numbers showing MK/NAOMI was running about 500 million annually from 1950 to a high in the mid 60's.

A half $billion a year.

That's an enormous amount of money in the '50s.

<quote on>

Q: Looking at your previous executive session testimony, apparently you developed for them a fountain pen.

What did the fountain pen do?

Senseney: The fountain pen was a variation of an M-1. The M-1 in itself was a system and it could be fired

from anything. It could be put into--

Q: Could it fire a dart or an aerosol or what?

Senseney: It was a dart.

Q: It fired a dart, a starter, were you talking about a fluorescent light starter?

Senseney: That is correct.

Q: What did it do?

Senseney: It put out an aerosol in the room when you put the switch on.

Q: What did the aerosol do?

Senseney: It would contaminate anybody in the room.

Q: Meaning kill them or disable them?

Senseney: It depends on the agent. If you are using a lethal agent, it would probably kill. If it was a

debilitating thing, it would just ake you sick for a while.

Q: Did you give that to the CIA.

Senseney: No.

Q: Only the Special Forces for the Army?

Senseney: The Special Forces did not even want that. [general laughter]

<quote off>

Senseney consistently describes MK/NAOMI at Ft Detrick as customers for the dart weapon project.

A half a billion dollars a year -- in the 50's! -- for five or six darts every five or six weeks?

So...where did the money go?

Edited November 19, 2015 by Cliff Varnell