George Sawtelle Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 I've not read much critique on the veracity of Tosh Plumlee's account of an abort team in Dealey Plaza the time and day of the assassination. I take that to mean most people familiar with Plumlee's account believe him. He said the CIA had flown in a team to stop the assassination. He was the co-pilot who piloted the plane which carried the abort team. If the CIA planned and executed the assassination they would have known who the snipers were and where they were located. Their agents and/or handlers would have been in radio contact with them. If the CIA wanted to stop the assassination, they only needed to contact the snipers and ask them to stand down before the snipers were in place. Now it's possible a particular section of the CIA planned and executed the assassination without the knowledge of the director or supervisors of other CIA sections. If this is the case the assassination would not fall under the auspices of the CIA. The section responsible would be considered a rogue unit within the agency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Schmidt Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Or simply: Tosh Plumlee is lying and there was no "abort team." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 34 minutes ago, Brian Schmidt said: Or simply: Tosh Plumlee is lying and there was no "abort team." Tosh is a member of this forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Compartmentalization people.... Tosh's POV and what the actual plans were, remains irreconcilable. There's very little reason not to believe him, there is also no reason to believe he was not part of the deniability plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Let's assume that Tosh's story is true. Why would the CIA want to abort the assassination? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 (edited) On 5/2/2017 at 7:30 AM, Michael Clark said: Tosh is a member of this forum. Dear Michael, Tosh has been voluntarily inactive here for a very, very long time. You do get a highly-cherished "Brownie Point," though. "Keep up the good work!" LOL -- Tommy Edited May 21, 2017 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Schmidt Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 48 minutes ago, Ron Ecker said: Let's assume that Tosh's story is true. Why would the CIA want to abort the assassination? Exactly. And why wouldn't they be able to have done it successfully? Couldn't they just tell the secret service and re-route or stop the parade? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Sawtelle Posted May 2, 2017 Author Share Posted May 2, 2017 Brian Tosh said there was no urgency to stop the assassination simply because Kennedy's life had been threatened many times and nothing happened. According to Tosh, the CIA received information about the assassination attempt in Dallas from informants in Texas and two Cubans who tried to assassinate Kennedy in Tampa. Tosh and his team were briefed on 20 Nov 1963 and took the news nonchalantly. So there was no need to change the parade route. I'm sure the Secret Service knew of the threat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Sawtelle Posted May 2, 2017 Author Share Posted May 2, 2017 Ron The CIA had no role in the assassination. They gathered together three teams and briefed them on what to look for, which means they took the threat as credible. If the CIA sat on this information and did nothing and word leaked out after the assassination that the CIA had been informed by Texas informants and Cubans fingers would have been pointing at them. I believe the CIA knew in general what was going down in Dallas but they chose to stay out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 1 hour ago, George Sawtelle said: Brian Tosh said there was no urgency to stop the assassination simply because Kennedy's life had been threatened many times and nothing happened. According to Tosh, the CIA received information about the assassination attempt in Dallas from informants in Texas and two Cubans who tried to assassinate Kennedy in Tampa. Tosh and his team were briefed on 20 Nov 1963 and took the news nonchalantly. So there was no need to change the parade route. I'm sure the Secret Service knew of the threat. Wouldn't it be something if LHO was the person who had warned the authorities (according to Tosh), not unlike the "Lee" who had done same regarding the earlier Chicago plot? -- Tommy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 52 minutes ago, George Sawtelle said: Ron The CIA had no role in the assassination. They gathered together three teams and briefed them on what to look for, which means they took the threat as credible. If the CIA sat on this information and did nothing and word leaked out after the assassination that the CIA had been informed by Texas informants and Cubans fingers would have been pointing at them. I believe the CIA knew in general what was going down in Dallas but they chose to stay out of it. The CIA or the FBI? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 George, No interest in debating the Plumlee story with you. But I would like to alert you to the difference between the terms, "evidence" and "proof". Its significant. I would also like to alert you to the difference between sworn testimony, unsworn testimony, and documentary evidence or exhibits. What you just stated does not approach the standard that you billed the thread as. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger DeLaria Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 I don't know much about Mr. Plumlee's story, as I haven't really looked into it. That being said, I don't believe the CIA as an organization was behind it. I lean on the side of a faction within the agency, outside of the general knowledge of most of the company employees. There would be major compartmentalization even within those involved. Of course, there were probably people outside of the faction that heard talk, rumours, rumblings, etc., and figured out agency involvement, but certainly would keep that to themselves out of self preservation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Andrews Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 The section responsible would be considered a rogue unit within the agency. I suggest it was a compartmentalized section run by Dulles, Helms and Phillips. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Sawtelle Posted May 2, 2017 Author Share Posted May 2, 2017 Jim Thanks for the advice. I've always believed that proof is what one can prove in court and that proof trumps evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now