The Ultimate USAEC secrets per the JFK hit.

[Larry Hancock]

I'm not sure why I keep doing this but... In Nexus I specifically connect Morales to Angleton in a working CI relationship dealing with Cuba and Cuban exiles. I connect Harvey, Angleton and

Morales in assassination operations against Castro. I also connect Harvey and Morales and Roselli and likely Robertson in a Castro assassination team and in meetings in spring 1963 which

very likely focused on JFK's new backchannel contacts with Castro - pure treason to all those in the Florida meeting. -- actually I don't do this on my own, I present work by Twyman, Morley and others but also documents. Connecting Morales to the highest operational levels in CIA Cuban ops is not a problem, he was very much aware of what was going on in the SGA. Having said that there is also a clear pattern of Morales conducting his own vest pocket operations, yes he was very much rogue as far as HQ was but only on occasion - but so were Hecksher, Sforza, Phillips and several others in that period. HQ was never in as much tactical control as they thought and for that matter given the standard practiced of deniablity really didn't want to it...which is what covered their rear when several of these same guys named above started assassinations in Chile and across Latin America later on.

Now back to my buddy Bill and blackmail. He can speak for himself but my view is that the poison pill (not blackmail) activity in MC was to leave evidence that would scare off the highest

levels of government from investigation of an assassination which appeared to have CIA officers involved in some fashion. Which is exactly what happened on Sunday morning Nov. 24 in

a meeting at the White House.

-- Larry

[Paul Trejo]

...In Nexus I specifically connect Morales to Angleton in a working CI relationship dealing with Cuba and Cuban exiles. I connect Harvey, Angleton and Morales in assassination operations against Castro.

I also connect Harvey and Morales and Roselli and likely Robertson in a Castro assassination team and in meetings in spring 1963 which very likely focused on JFK's new backchannel contacts with Castro - pure treason to all those in the Florida meeting.

...Connecting Morales to the highest operational levels in CIA Cuban ops is not a problem, he was very much aware of what was going on in the SGA.

Having said that there is also a clear pattern of Morales conducting his own vest pocket operations, yes he was very much rogue as far as HQ was but only on occasion -- but so were Hecksher, Sforza, Phillips and several others in that period.

HQ was never in as much tactical control as they thought and for that matter given the standard practiced of deniablity really didn't want it...

Now back to my buddy Bill and blackmail. He can speak for himself but my view is that the poison pill (not blackmail) activity in MC was to leave evidence that would scare off the highest levels of government from investigation of an assassination which appeared to have CIA officers involved in some fashion. Which is exactly what happened on Sunday morning Nov. 24 in a meeting at the White House.

-- Larry

Larry, I appreciate your expert participation in this discussion. I think we all agree that William Harvey, James Jesus Angleton and David Sanchez Morales worked closely in CIA Counterintelligence with Cuban Exiles to try to murder Fidel Castro and take back Cuba from the Communists.

The fact that they brought in elements from the Mafia, e.g. Johnny Roselli in early 1963 is also a well-accepted fact of history. I think most of us agree that these three high-level CIA Agents, Harvey, Angleton and Morales were suspicious of JFK and RFK (to put it mildly). Some of us agree that they were so accustomed to power and secrets that they could be tempted to act on their own -- as ROGUES.

They decided that JFK making back-channel discussions with Fidel Castro was collaboration with the Communist Enemy -- flat treason. Insofar as they thought this, they were NOT acting in cooperation with the Official CIA, but most likely with forces OUTSIDE the CIA.

By suspecting JFK of "treason" these CIA ROGUES were joining forces, quite deliberately and with their eyes wide open, with the John Birch Society. The meetings in New Orleans at hotels owned by Mafioso Carlos Marcello, in which David Morales is reported there along with Guy Banister, Ex-General Edwin Walker, Fred Crisman and Thomas Beckham, are part of Joan Mellen's well-known narrative (c.f. Farewell to Justice, 2005).

There were the seeds of the JFK murder. This was a ROGUE operation. It involved ROGUE CIA men acting in cooperation with wild cards from the John Birch Society. This is why Jack Ruby told Chief Justice Earl Warren: "there is a John Birch Society right now in activity, and Edwin Walker is one of the top men of this organization."

I agree with you, Larry, when you point out that CIA headquarters relied too much on its "plausible deniability," because IMHO this inadvertently gave powerful ROGUE Agents a green light to do anything they wanted.

In my opinion, to get back to Bill Simpich and his theory of Morales blackmailing the CIA -- I also agree with you that 'blackmail' isn't the correct interpretation. It seems to me that Morales knew about the Lee Harvey Oswald gambit, already set up by Guy Banister and David Ferrie throughout the Spring and Summer of 1963, to make Oswald look like an FPCC officer.

What David Morales did, I suspect, was to try to link Lee Harvey Oswald to the KGB. That was the key. That is why the impersonators of Oswald and Duran in that wiretapped phone call made sure that the name of Valery Kostikov was mentioned in the tape.

The whole purpose of the JFK murderers was to lay blame on the COMMUNISTS. Their aim was to enrage the USA People in order to motivate the USA to invade Cuba and kill Fidel Castro and take back Cuba from the Communists. This is plain from their countless actions.

I don't think that Morales wanted to blackmail the CIA. I don't even think that Morales knew (as Bill Simpich suggests) that the CIA would start a mole-hunt and camouflage Oswald's 201 file.

The fact that the CIA did start a mole-hunt and did camouflage Oswald's 201 file is no proof that this was intended by David Morales. I think David Morales simply wanted to link Oswald with Kostikov in order to motivate the USA to invade Cuba.

Bill Simpich deserves a medal, IMHO, for explaining why this photograph of a six-foot Russian dude was labeled as Lee Harvey Oswald. I always wondered how that could happen. Now we know -- it was part of the CIA camouflage of Oswald's 201 file, intended to smoke out a suspected mole in Angleton's mole-hunt for the Insiders who impersonated Oswald and Duran using the wiretapped telephone between the Cuban consulate and the USSR consulate.

Furthermore, the fact that Angleton started a mole-hunt is evidence that Angleton himself was unaware of the actions that David Morales was performing. This is more evidence that Morales was acting as a ROGUE.

So, IMHO, Simpich's brilliant proof of a CIA mole-hunt is also hard evidence of the INNOCENCE of the CIA high-command in the victimization of Lee Harvey Oswald.

(I do believe that David Atlee Phillips was involved in the JFK murder (although he didn't openly confess as did Morales and Hunt) as shown by his interaction with Lee Harvey Oswald and Antonio Venciana of Alpha 66 in Dallas in September 1963. Yet again -- Phillips was acting as a ROGUE due to his personal involvement in the Bay of Pigs. I'm open to debate on this point, just as I'm open to debate about the participation of General Edward Lansdale.)

So, Larry, despite the brilliance of Bill Simpich and yourself, I still disagree with both of you on this single point -- that David Morales was trying to "scare off the highest levels of government" by implicating the CIA in the JFK murder.

On the contrary -- the fact that the CIA really was "scared off" was a miscalculation on the part of Morales. Morales only wanted (along with the JBS) to convince the American People to invade Cuba.

HOWEVER -- the fact that the USA never invaded Cuba is also hard evidence, IMHO, that the JFK murderers were totally *separate* from those who covered up the murder.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

<edited>

Edited July 29, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Steven Gaal]

I don't think that Morales wanted to blackmail the CIA. I don't even think that Morales knew (as Bill Simpich suggests) that the CIA would start a mole-hunt and camouflage Oswald's 201 file.

The fact that the CIA did start a mole-hunt and did camouflage Oswald's 201 file is no proof that this was intended by David Morales. I think David Morales simply wanted to link Oswald with Kostikov in order to motivate the USA to invade Cuba.

+++++++++++++++
OR it wasnt a mole hunt (thats an assumption). It could be just to confuse other intel agencies identity of LHO long enough to be part of assassination project.

)))))))))))))))))))))))

Ive done original research on Scribner, Hall and Casey (1963 law.firm) Casey was reported as a outside of the CIA Dulles operative. Hall was a Republican Party stalwart (heading Republican Party Congressional division and working on JFK-Nixon TV debates). Hall also was OSS working with Donovan. The Dulles were also Republican Party stalwarts helping Dewey right his speeches and setting up with illegal CIA monies the Ethnic Republican division. Scribner was head lawyer Treasury Dept.

------------------------------ then is replaced by

Gaspard d'Andelot Belin as head lawyer of the Treasury Dept. who socialized with Bundy,James Jesus Angleton,Mary Bancroft and Allen Dulles

###########################################

I believe that a few members of the Secret Service were part of the assassination.

This does not fit into the "ROGUE" hypothesis.

Edited July 25, 2014 by Steven Gaal

[Paul Trejo]

I believe that a few members of the Secret Service were part of the assassination.

This does not fit into the "ROGUE" hypothesis.

Steven, I think this is one of the most important questions of current JFK research.

It seems to me that the most suspicious behavior of all regarding the Secret Service on the day of the JFK murder is the obvious fact shown by the Zapruder film, that the Secret Service driver of JFK's limo seems to be slowing down after the first few shots are fired, instead of speeding up.

The JFK limo only speeds up after the limo driver looks back to see the head shot, and then the JFK limo speeds away to Parkland Hospital.

Now, it is part of paramilitary SOP ambush protocol to block or slow down the target vehicle in an ambush like this. So, one can make a case (and of course a number of writers already have) that the Secret Service was clearly part of the JFK murder plot.

If that is the case, then one must immediately argue: (1) was the full Secret Service part of the JFK murder plot; or (2) were only a few Secret Service agents part of the JFK murder plot; or (3) was only the Secret Service limo driver part of the JFK murder plot?

Of course, if the answer is (1), then I must agree with you, that this cannot be a Rogue plot, but a high-level plot. However, if the answer is (2) then we have a longer debate on our hands. However, if the answer is (3) then we have the probability of a Rogue plot again.

And yet there is still a fourth alternative. It is possible that the slowdown of the JFK limo was not controlled by the JFK limo driver, but by Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry who was the driver of the first limo in the motorcade -- the man who was responsible for choosing the motorcade route, and deliberately led the motorcade into the Grassy Knoll area.

Jesse Curry, in the lead car, could have slowed down to a crawl, thus forcing the JFK limo to slow down. That is a real possibility.

Therefore, before I suspect the ENTIRE Secret Service of being involved in the JFK murder plot, I must demand more evidence. And I might even relax my suspicions of the JFK's limo driver if I can somehow argue that he was trusting in Jesse Curry for his cues.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited July 27, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Steven Gaal]

Guest_Don Jeffries_*

=====

We've often heard that Greer was not JFK's regular driver, and this has sometimes been used to excuse his inept performance in Dealey Plaza. I would think that even a one hour seminar would have imparted enough information to a presidential limousine driver to make him realize that you don't slow down (or perhaps stop) when you hear the sound of gunfire during a motorcade. The total lack or reaction by JFK's entire Secret Service contingent that day was inexcusable and should have been properly investigated. Of course, we could say the same thing about the crime itself.

If I recall correctly, Vince Palamara interviewed Greer's son years after the assassination. The son admitted that Greer didn't personally like JFK, and his reason was that "well, he was Catholic, you know," or words to that effect. I would urge all critics to read the great research done by Palamara, much of which is available online.
.....I don't think Greer's modest background-although it makes for a nice story-has anything to do with his total lack of response during the app. six seconds of shooting. Greer and his fellow agents had to have been warned to be extra-cautious, if anything, with the climate in Dallas (remember Adlai Stevenson had been attacked just the month before by extremely conservative citizens there). He had been driving the presidential limousine for quite a while, and as I mentioned before, a one hour seminar should have been sufficient for him to know not to slow down (or stop) when he heard the sound of gunfire during a presidential motorcade. The fact that he turned around, saw JFK's obvious reaction to the first shot that struck him, and continued watching him until the fatal head shot, speaks volumes about his culpability, IMHO. At the very least, he should have sped up instantly once he saw JFK's hands rising to his throat (after hearing the sound of gunfire).

One of the very first steps that should have been taken in a real investigation of the assassination of JFK would have been the intense grilling of each Secret Service agent in the presidential contingent. They should have been asked the hard questions about total lack of reaction, the late night drinking the night before, and the undeniable fact that LBJ's Secret Service contingent was not confused at all, reacting instantly and keeping their man out of the line of fire.

It's true that it's easy to be a Monday morning quarterback and second-guess the response of these agents, in an undeniably stressful and fast-paced series of events. However, that was their job, and they had all been well-trained for it. Presumably, they had all been told that when shots are fired, there is very little time to react, and that they must be prepared to protect the president instantly. I can understand one, or two, or even three agents being lethargic and not reacting at all to the sound of gunfire, but for every agent there to stare into space, or actually slow the car down in the case of Greer, without running towards JFK to push him down out of the line of fire, is completely unbelievable to me. In terms of conspiracy, the most obvious participants, IMHO, were the Secret Service agents assigned to protect JFK.
=======

Bernice Moore

BREAKDOWN OF SECRET SERVICE HIERARCHY/ INFRASTRUCTURE


THE TOP TREASURY OFFICIALS:
1) C. DOUGLAS DILLON- Sec of the Treasury (former OSS) : on a Cabinet
plane bound for Japan via Hawaii with *
2) ASST. SEC. ROBERT A. WALLACE- with Rowley at a luncheon in D.C.;
denied dead agent reports;
3) ACTING SEC. G. d’ANDELOT BELIN- stepped in in Dillon’s absence
1963-1964 (related to David?);
4) [uNDERSEC. HENRY “JOE” H. FOWLER- replaced Dillon in Jan. 1965]


THE PRESS SECRETARIES:
1) *PRESS SECRETARY PIERRE SALINGER- code book missing from plane;
according to Pierre, only missed “two or three” trips (almost definitely
only one: Texas); extremely knowledgeable about motorcade planning/
security- worked with Secret Service on all prior advance work… except
for the Texas trip;
2) ASST. PRESS SEC. (#2) ANDREW HATCHER- in D.C. inactive (allegedly
because Hatcher was African-American, but a member of JFK's Secret
Service detail, Robert Faison, was also African-American and was with
President Kennedy throughout the Texas trip);
3) ASST. PRESS SEC. (#3) MALCOLM KILDUFF- first trip on his own:
official debut; essentially a non-player out of the loop;

THE CHIEF’S OFFICE:
1) CHIEF JAMES J. ROWLEY- with Wallace^;
2) DEPUTY CHIEF PAUL J. PATERNI- member of OSS during WWII- worked with
James Angleton and Ray Rocca (liaison to WC); involved in limousine
inspection with Boring, beating Rowley and Kellerman---and the FBI--- to
the punch (skull particles, bullet fragments, vehicle damage/
windshield); involved in LHO income tax check investigation right after
assassination; checked on CIA connections of suspects Mosley and Homer
Echevarria for the Chicago field office- matter was summarily dropped by
a call from headquarters telling the field office agents who spoke to
Paterni to send all memos, files, and notebooks to D.C. and not to
discuss the case with anyone!; Thomas Kelley- liaison to WC: assigned by
Paterni to go to Dallas and speak to LHO;
3) DEPUTY CHIEF EDWARD WILDY- totally out of the loop;..


THE TOP THREE AGENTS OF THE WHITE HOUSE DETAIL (THE SAIC’S OFFICE):
1) SAIC GERALD A. BEHN- in D.C. inactive: first full vacation in three
years under JFK;
2) ASAIC (#2) FLOYD M. BORING- in D.C. at home but IN CHARGE OF PLANNING
THE TEXAS TRIP [bishop, 1988 edition, p. 558; Truman Library Oral
History, p.63- on all the advance work…assigned to all the advance work;
JFK Library Oral History;interviews with Sam Kinney and Floyd Boring
1993-1994]; involved in limo inspection with Paterni, Trade Mart
decision, PRS checks, giving Lawson the Dallas assignment, etc.-
http://www.njmetrone...ara/boring.html
3) ASAIC (#3) ROY H. KELLERMAN- First major trip on his own in a
supervisory capacity without either Behn OR Boring;


THE WHD ADVANCE AGENTS:
1) WINSTON G. LAWSON (LEAD CAR)- WHD advance agent (and former CIC
agent---still with the Former Intelligence Officers Association!): only
did advance work for a short time before Dallas;
2) DAVID B. GRANT (TRADE MART)- Lawson’s oft-forgotten partner from
11/13-11/22/63; physically joined Lawson in Dallas 11/18/63 from Florida
trip (manned by ASAIC Boring in place of Behn); Boring’s right hand man
for Chicago, Florida, and Texas advances;

THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE ADVANCE MEN:
1) JERRY BRUNO- CHIEF DNC ADVANCE MAN: early organizer but not in
Dallas---adamantly against Trade Mart/ choice of route (out of the
loop);
2) MARTY UNDERWOOD- DNC ADVANCE MAN for Houston and Austin---adamantly
against choice of route. Heard rumors of impending
assassination---received confirmation of plot from CIA Officer Win Scott
shortly after assassination (out of the loop)!;
3) JACK PUTERBAUGH- DNC ADVANCE MAN for Dallas: IN PILOT CAR WITH LT.
COL GEORGE WHITMEYER- taught Army Intelligence, not originally scheduled
to be in motorcade. As for Puterbaugh himself, he denied any involvement
in the Tade mart decision he was subsequently “blamed” for. He is often
blamed for the motorcade route change, as well…



THE SHIFT LEADERS OF THE WHD (SAIC ASSISTANTS):
1) ATSAIC EMORY P. ROBERTS – in command of FOLLOW-UP CAR in Dallas:
ordered agent Henry J. Rybka back from rear of limo at Love Field,
ordered agents not to move after first shot on Elm Street, recalled
agent John Ready during/ shortly after one of the (head) shots. Usurps
Kellerman’s authority at Parkland Hospital;
2) ATSAIC STEWART G. STOUT, JR.- stationed at the TRADE MART (out of the
loop);
3) ATSAIC ARTHUR L. GODFREY- stationed in AUSTIN (also out of the loop);

THE V.P./ LBJ DETAIL:
1) SAIC OF LBJ DETAIL H. STUART KNIGHT- in D.C. inactive- transfer to
become effective 11/25/63 (out of the loop);
2) ASAIC (#2) RUFUS W. YOUNGBLOOD- LBJ’s car: listens to walkie-talkie
w/ LBJ---both Dave Powers & Ralph Yarborough denied that Youngblood ever
vaulted over the seat the way LBJ claimed;


MISC.:
1) PRS AGENT GLENN A. BENNETT- temporarily assigned to WHD: why did he
ride in the follow-up car (he was an administrator)---to monitor threat
subjects?-
http://www.mindcushi...tomythreat.html
2) WILLIAM R. GREER- LIMO: slows limo, looks back at JFK twice, disobeys
Kellerman, etc.;
3) JOHN D. READY- neutralized by Roberts;
4) CLINTON J. HILL (ASSIGNED TO JACKIE)- disobeys Boring and Roberts by
riding on rear of limo four times before Elm St. AND by lunging for rear
of limo ON Elm Street;



PART TWO: FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC TRIPS INVOLVING MOTORCADES 1961-1963:
NORMAL SECURITY IN COMPARISON TO DALLAS-

1) agents on / near limo in Dealey Plaza/ Elm Street before/ during
shooting (up to/ inc. 11/18/63; Boring tells agents not to mount rear of
limo between 11/19 and 11/21, according to Clint Hill)- blamed on JFK!;
2) motorcycles- from upwards of 6 flanking units down to a measely 4
non-flanking units (11/18-11/22 Fort Worth; according to DPD, this
occure at the last minute: morning of 11/22+ meeting of 11/21 via SS/
Grant)- blamed on JFK!;
3) The Secret Service was knowledgable about prior/ existing threats of
11/2 [Chicago], 11/9 [Milteer/ Miami], and 11/18 [Tampa/ Miami]: Boring,
Grant, Bolden, Martineau, Kinney, etc. Remember PRS agent Bennett’s
mysterious placement in follow-up car on 11/22/63;
4) Protective Research Section (PRS): ZERO threats found for Dallas
trip, despite three known checks, Stevenson incident, Wanted for Treason
photos, and warnings to JFK: Senator William Fulbright, DNC advanceman
Marty Underwood, San Antonio Congressman Henry Gonzalez, etc.;
5) Deleted squad car (meeting of 11/21 between DPD and Secret Service/
Grant)
6) Motorcade route: two dangerous turns (90 and 120 degrees) involving
slow speeds in a warehouse district (TSBD)- changed between 11/18 and
11/19 in spite of at least two better/ alternate routes; driver- no
independent knowledge: had to follow the lead car;
7) Publication of route- by (and denied by) the Secret
Service---accomplished with the help of Betty Forsling Harris, Bill
Moyers, and “the agent in charge of the Dallas trip”!;
8) Vehicles out of original, numerical order- changed 11/22 at Love
Field;
9) Media (press busses), photographers (always in front- cancelled at
the last minute at Love Field), Cecil Stoughton ( rode near rear of
limo/ in follow-up car July to November 21, 1963), Godfrey McHugh, and
Ted Clifton- moved away from JFK/ limousine, against prior protocal /
motorcades. DMN photographer Tom Dillard. While confirming this last
minute cancellation, said this brought the press/ photographers “totally
out of the picture”!;
10) Omissions: Behn, Salinger (Hatcher), Knight, Bruno [Rowley, Dillon];

11) Trade Mart (VS. WOMEN’S BUILDING)- determined speed of cars,
motorcade route choices, and security of building---Secret Service had a
hand in this whole affair;
12) Sheriff Bill Decker (lead car)- order 11/22 not to participate…via a
call from D.C.?
13) Overpass crowded 11/22 in Dealey Plaza, against protocal;
14) Windows not watched 11/22, despite Lawson’s “usual instructions” to
do so;
15) ATSAIC Roberts: recall of SA Rybka at Love Field; recall of SA Ready
in the Plaza (SA Hill delay); order not to move; usurps Kellerman's
power at Parkland/ switch of allegiance;
16) Ambulances on standby- gone inc. “epileptic seizure” incident
12:25---five minutes before murder of JFK. Rike said his ambulance was
called to the Dealey Plaza area on several false alarms several days and
weeks before 11/22/63!;
17) No bubbletop- a protective device (shielded JFK via sun glare,
possible deflection, psychological deterrent)---often on car in partial
form, as well (just the rear piece, for example). Strange, multiple
responsibility [Harris, Lawson, Kellerman, Sorrels, O’Donnell, etc.];
ultimately, blamed on JFK (although it was Kinney’s sole/ regretted
decision)!;
18) JFK/LBJ: in same city in slow, open vehicles in close proximity to
each other---unique and quite a “no-no”;
19) Umbrella man- presence/ actions not noted about, written or oral
(cause for delay, confusion? Signal?). SS manual states that this is one
of many things to watch for!;
20) Special ordinance of 11/18 with DPD: permitted action against unruly
persons becoming involved with peaceful picketing---was this a loophole
designed to give plotters/ SS/ DPD some flexiblity to do certain things,
and not to do other things, regarding security?;
21) Greer: slows limo, 2 looks back, disobeys Kellerman; leads race to
Parkland ( despite contradictory radio transmissions of SS);
22) Marina captivity by SS;
23) Autopsy related: body, x-rays, photos, skull fragments, bullet
fragments---SS firmly in control of these crucial items of evidence;
24) CE399: in SS possession
25) Limo: in SS possession---soon after rebuilt, destroying moving crime
scene/ evidence;
26) “dead” agent---many media outlets reported this as fact, at
different times and in different ways (inc. location);
27) “SS” agents---phoney or REAL agents in the plaza;
28) drinking incident 11/21-11/22: inc. four agents who rode in the
follow-up car: Hill, Ready, Bennett, and Landis!;

=====

John Simkin

Winston G. Lawson is an interesting character. When I first began investigating him I felt his career as a SS agenr did not make sense.

Lawson joined the US Army in 1953 and after basic training was sent to the CIC Counterintelligence School in Holabird, Maryland. Based at Lexington, during the Korean War he took part in the interviewing of prisoners.

In 1955 Lawson returned to the Carnation Milk Company and had various sales or public relations jobs with them in Poughkeepsie. He applied to enter the Secret Service in 1956 but was not accepted until October 1959.

Why the reluctance to take him? Yet, once appointed he makes rapid progress. He did general investigative work in the Syracuse area, until being transferred to Washington in March, 1961. Soon afterwards he was given responsibility for organizing the security for trips being made by President John F. Kennedy and Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson.

How did the SS justify the fact that he was kept waiting to join for 3 years but within 16 months he had one of the most important jobs in the service?

http://www.spartacus.../JFKlawsonW.htm

====#####====

##############

deep politics forum

Peter Dale Scott writes:

"Another army reserve officer in Dealey Plaza may have been Winston Lawson,
the White House Secret Service agent responsible for the choice of the Kennedy
motorcade route (4 WH 318). Lawson’s first three reports of what happened on
and before November 22 raise considerable questions about his performance.
For example he reported that motorcycles were used on “the right and left flanks
of the President's car” (17 WH 605; cf. 17 WH 624, 18 WH 741) although photographs
show that they accompanied at the rear (21 WH 768–770). Numerous
later reports from the Dallas police agreed that at Lawson’s own instructions the
proposed side escorts were redeployed to the rear of the car (7 WH 581,
3 WH 244, 18 WH 809, 21 WH 571). This change, ostensibly for the sake of security,
would appear to leave the President more open to a possible crossfire."

HSCA concluded:

"The Secret Service’s alteration of the original Dallas Police Department motorcycle deployment
plan prevented the use of maximum possible security precautions … Surprisingly, the
security measure used in the prior motorcades during the same Texas visit shows that the
deployment of motorcycles in Dallas by the Secret Service may have been uniquely insecure
… The Secret Service knew more than a day before November 22 that the President did not
want motorcycles riding alongside or parallel to the Presidential vehicle …. "

As far as JFK's security preferences as described in the final sentence above are concerned, Vince Palamara writes,

"One would have to wonder if that last sentence was pure sarcasm, as at least 6 motorcycles
surrounded JFK’s limousine (including one or two directly beside him) on June 29, 1962 in Mexico City,
March 23, 1963 in Chicago,on the European tour of June–July 1963 (encompassing Germany, Italy,
England, and Ireland), the November 18, 1963 Florida trip,and, most importantly, in San
Antonio on November 21, 1963, Houston on November 21, 1963, and Fort Worth on the morning
of November 22, 1963. Indeed, the USSS Final Survey Report dated November 30, 1963 for the
Houston Trip of November 21, 1963 states: 'On all motorcade movements, six motorcycles
flanked the Presidential limousine … in the downtown area of Houston, in addition to the six
motorcycles flanking the Presidential limousine, 24 motorcycles flanked the President’s
limousine near the sidewalk (12 on each side).' As HSCA attorney Belford Lawson noted:
'If JFK’s views of motorcycle deployment were well known, then why did it take six days for the SS
to convey them to the DPD?'"

(for Palamara's full essay, see www.assassinationresearch.com/v4n1/v4n1chapter06.pdf )


=====

THE STRANGE ACTIONS (AND INACTION)
OF AGENT EMORY ROBERTS

http://www.jfklink.com/articles/EmoryRoberts.html

======

Six weeks before JFK was murdered in Dallas, his Secret Service driver Tom Shipman died of a sudden heart attack in Camp David. This made room for William Greer. Greer didn't accelerate the limousine after the first shot, instead he slowed the car down. (vincepalamara.com)

==

drunkenshrew[ Vince Palamara was looking for records of Tom Shipman since at least 1997. Here is what he wrote in the article:

SA Tom Shipman died in late 1963, before the Texas trip. This was the extent of the author’s knowledge from 1997, the time of discovery, until 1999, when the author came across an online website dedicated to fallen officers that listed Shipman’s middle initial,22 and, most importantly, on July 26, 2001, when the following information was discovered by the author, once again via the internet: the website of the Association of Former Agents of the U.S. Secret Service,23 which lists 34 agents that passed away in the line of duty—out of literally thousands of men and women—since the late nineteenth century. The only JFK-era agent listed is White House Garage/Chauffeur Special Agent Thomas B. Shipman: “October 14, 1963: Died of a heart attack while on a presidential protective assignment at Camp David, Maryland.”

So while information about Shipman might have been hidden for a time, this is clearly no longer true. The unclear and unstructured article can be partially explained by Palamara's comment.

^^^^^^^^^

HOWEVER (Gaal)

[–]TheTruthWasOutThere

This made room for William Greer.

The problem with this statement comes from the linked article. Greer was usually the driver for JFK, and Shipman was usually the driver of the following vehicle, the #2 car.

From the article:

Former agent Gerald Blaine told the author that Kinney, Shipman, and Greer were “the three consistent ones” that drove JFK’s car (commenting that Greer “usually” did), also adding that Shipman and Kinney drove the follow-up car, as well.

############################################################

Well it was certain Greer would be the driver for JFK after the Camp Daivd 'heart attack'. (Gaal)

Edited July 27, 2014 by Steven Gaal

[Paul Brancato]

Paul T - what exactly is your definition of 'rogue' as it apples here? Certainly lack of a paper trail between agents and their upper level employees means little.

[David Andrews]

Paul T - what exactly is your definition of 'rogue' as it apples here? Certainly lack of a paper trail between agents and their upper level employees means little.

A great point for use in making distinctions.

[Paul Trejo]

Paul T - what exactly is your definition of 'rogue' as it apples here? Certainly lack of a paper trail between agents and their upper level employees means little.

Well, Paul B., my definition of a ROGUE is a CIA Agent (or an FBI Agent or other high-level official) who acts on his or her own without the knowledge and approval of their immediate superiors inside that Agency.

This is my argument -- that people as high up in the CIA as David Morales and David Atlee Phillips, might form a secret cabal of CIA ROGUES to act on their private political belief that JFK was a Communist.

The leadership of the CIA, namely John McCone and Richard Helms, would not be told about their plans. Furthermore, this secret cabal would operate with others outside of the CIA for coordination and resources.

In my view, Joan Mellen offers plenty of evidence that David Morales was a ringleader of such a cabal, and that he was supported by the ultra-right-wing leaders like Guy Banister and Edwin Walker in Louisiana, in meetings at sites owned by mobster Carlos Marcello. Here was the bankroller, and here were the true leaders of the plot.

There were many plots to murder JFK -- most of them just talk -- some of them swindles -- but at least one was ready to go as soon as the patsy was selected. Edwin Walker selected the patsy on Easter Sunday, 1963 -- this is what the available evidence indicates to me.

As a member of the JBS (John Birch Society), which had long been preaching that US Presidents were making secret deals with the Communists, Edwin Walker contacted his fellow JBS leader, Guy Banister, in Louisiana. Both men were also leaders in the national paramilitary movement, The Minutemen. Together they agreed to frame Lee Harvey Oswald for their plot. Now the wheels started turning.

The Minutemen were also involved in the Cuban Exile training camps that were funded by the CIA through David Morales and David Atlee Phillips. So, the connection was natural, and the meeting of the ROGUE CIA men, who wanted to act on the belief that JFK was a Communist, was supported, not by the official CIA leadership, but by wealthy supporters of the JBS in Louisiana and Dallas.

Joan Mellen places the first coordinated meeting of this JBS leadership with CIA ROGUE leader, David Morales, in Louisiana in the early summer of 1963. This is the period investigated by NOLA DA Jim Garrison.

There were CIA connected people in this Louisiana plot -- not CIA Agents -- but low-level CIA assets with big egos, e.g. Clay Shaw, David Ferrie, Fred Crisman, Jack S. Martin, Frank Sturgis, Gerry Patrick Hemming, Loran Hall and Larry Howard. These were the Americans in the group, who would be the leaders of the Cuban Exiles in the plot.

This view, as I read it, is entirely in sync with the story of John Martino as presented by Larry Hancock (SMHT/2010).

The two highest level CIA Agents who "confessed" were David Morales and Howard Hunt. (Low-level but connected people who confessed were Frank Sturgis, John Martino and Harry Dean). However, as Larry Hancock noted, all Howard Hunt really said was that Frank Sturgis invited him to a meeting with David Morales, and that David Morales laid out the plot before his eyes. Hunt took no further action.

Howard Hunt was merely "on the sidelines" as a "bench warmer" he admitted. Therefore, the whole story that LBJ was involved, and that Cord Meyer was involved -- is really a rumor that came from David Morales. Thus Howard Hunt only knew what David Morales told him.

Therefore, as far as I can see, David Morales was the highest level CIA Agent who was involved in the JFK murder. He basically confessed to it, just as Howard Hunt confessed to being "on the sidelines." Until I see more material evidence, I won't accuse anybody higher than David Morales.

I once thought that David Atlee Phillips was guaranteed guilty -- but I can't guarantee that anymore, after reviewing SWHT/2010. Phillips probably knew what was going on, but I see no guarantee that he helped with his eyes open. For example, when Antonio Veciana met David Phillips in Dallas with Lee Harvey Oswald, that was in the context of a murder-Fidel plot, not a murder-JFK plot. (Also, in his 1977 book, The Night Watch, Phillips says that Lee Oswald was training in a plot to murder Fidel Castro, and he was surprised that Oswald was diverted to a plot to murder JFK.) So, it's at least possible that Morales kept his JFK murder plot secret from Phillips. I'm open to debate on this.

I once thought that Edward Lansdale was guaranteed guilty -- but I can't guarantee that anymore. He was the one who sent Fletcher Prouty to the South Pole instead of to Dallas to protect JFK, and he was also photographed in Dealey Plaza next to the infamous Three Tramps. Yet his close relationship of to JFK and RFK, combined with the possibility (however remote) that he was in Dealey Plaza to try to prevent the JFK murder, were recently proposed by Larry Hancock, and I have no ready proofs against his challenge.

I still suspect William Harvey very strongly -- yet he was no longer a high-ranking member of the CIA during this time, because he had been demoted by RFK and sent to Italy to spend his last years in the CIA. This could have been a motive for Harvey to participate in some way -- but again, he was thousands of miles away from the action. (I have little doubt that Harvey cheered when JFK was murdered, but that alone is no proof of his part in a conspiracy.)

I still suspect James Jesus Angleton very strongly -- yet he started a mole-hunt in Mexico City after a breach that was probably done by David Morales and crew (namely, the impersonation of Sylvia Duran and Lee Harvey Oswald in a phone call from the Cuban consulate to the USSR consulate). That is evidence, rather, that James Jesus Angleton himself did not know what David Morales was up to. So I even have my doubts about Angleton, now (thanks to Bill Simpich).

So -- the highest level person I can find in the CIA behind the JFK murder plot is David Morales -- a hothead who was accustomed to assassination, having managed the assassination of thousands of leftists in Latin America during this same time period. His closest associates in the CIA would also be suspect -- Rip Robertson being first among them, who was very close to John Martino.

As Larry Hancock points out, John Martino only told us this: that "Anti-Castro people" murdered JFK. That is too wide a net for an easy answer. John Martino gave us no names. However, by tracing those CIA people with whom John Martino was in contact -- this give us our best clues. David Morales was the highest level person. Then Rip Robertson, who reported to Martino.

After that, we must drop down to the low-level assets Johnny Roselli, for example, and Frank Sturgis.

But Larry Hancock also notes a vital fact: there were other Anti-Castro people in the USA at the time, not just the CIA and the Cuban Exiles. For example, on page 201 of SWHT/2010 Larry Hancock notes that the John Birch Society sponsored John Martino's speaking tours. The JBS and the Minutemen provide the most active elements of civilian Anti-Castro movement. It seems clear from the evidence that David Morales worked closely with these elements.

Again -- if the highest CIA Agent that I can guarantee in the plot was David Morales, then I can easily argue that the high-level CIA command did not know about Morales' plans and actions -- and therefore Morales was a ROGUE. In this role, he would need support from outside the CIA, and he would find that support in the JBS/Minutemen and Cuban Exile gaggle of right-wing fanatics.

I trust this answers your question, Paul B. Did I leave anything out?

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

Edited July 30, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

Paul Trejo wrote: "The fact that the CIA did start a mole-hunt and did camouflage Oswald's 201 file is no proof that this was intended by David Morales. I think David Morales simply wanted to link Oswald with Kostikov in order to motivate the USA to invade Cuba."

+++++++++++++++

OR...it wasnt a mole hunt (thats an assumption). It could be just to confuse other intel agencies identity of LHO long enough to be part of assassination project...

Steve, the latest writing by Bill Simpich argues conclusively, I believe, that it certainly was a mole-hunt.

In my view, this is clear proof that the CIA was a house divided -- and that ROGUE Agents were plaguing the system.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited July 29, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Brancato]

Its much more comfortable to think that the actions of high level operatives like Morales and Phillips acted on their own with the likes of private citizens Walker and Banister. I just don't believe it Paul. You are so convinced you've got the whole conspiracy neatly tied up. At least the really big boys had nothing to do with it. Of course, plausible deniability is the name of the game in operations like this. You will never find the smoking guns higher up, because that's the whole modus operandi. Any idea why Helms and Angleton and Dulles might be so good at covering up for the terrible rogue actions of their employees? Maybe its because if they had tried to pin it on these rogues they would have talked. Paul, you always said you were interested in the ground crew. Now I know why. You can rest safely knowing it went no higher. Our democracy is safe. Just some rogues.

[Paul Trejo]

Its much more comfortable to think that the actions of high level operatives like Morales and Phillips acted on their own with the likes of private citizens Walker and Banister. I just don't believe it Paul. You are so convinced you've got the whole conspiracy neatly tied up. At least the really big boys had nothing to do with it. Of course, plausible deniability is the name of the game in operations like this. You will never find the smoking guns higher up, because that's the whole modus operandi. Any idea why Helms and Angleton and Dulles might be so good at covering up for the terrible rogue actions of their employees? Maybe its because if they had tried to pin it on these rogues they would have talked. Paul, you always said you were interested in the ground crew. Now I know why. You can rest safely knowing it went no higher. Our democracy is safe. Just some rogues.

Of course, Paul B., your objections are the appropriate ones. This is what most of my detractors are thinking, even if they don't say so.

Your main charge, of course, is that my theory is "comfortable." By that you mean that I'm simply too cowardly to presume that the CIA leadership, along with the Pentagon leadership, murdered JFK in cold blood and then lied about it to the American People. In other words, that our greatest leaders are themselves cowards who could not face up to the courage of their political convictions, and ran into the shadows to hide the Truth from the World.

But actually, Paul B., that's not much of an argument -- it's mainly just a series of insults.

Of course, if you had evidence, you would have shown it by now. Instead, your argument is based on emotional rhetoric like this.

The truth, however, is even more horrible than you suspect. Actually, I think it's more "comfortable" to blame a CIA and a Pentagon who hide from the world.

If my theory is correct (and I don't remember how many times I told you that I don't believe I've got the whole conspiracy tied up) then things are even more uncomfortable, because this means that the ultra-right-wing forces that murdered JFK were never brought to justice.

Furthermore, it means that they weren't brought to justice because our US Government knows very well that they comprise a huge, enormous minority of Americans, that to confront them directly would result in Civil War -- maybe even today.

Why? For the simple reason that these forces are precisely the same forces that fought the Civil War in the 1860's, and who fought the Civil Rights movement in the 1960's. The numbers are overwhelming, and the US Government had no choice in the past, and no choice today, but to compromise in our endlessly "uncomfortable" compromise.

Ultimately, the undercurrent of Racism in the USA is the Achilles Heel of our great World Empire. World History suggests that great Empires last an average of 200 years each (from the year that they assume global power, which in the case of the USA was 1945). Most global Empires lasted 200 years -- Assyria, Bablyon, Persia, Greece, England -- however, a few global Empires can last 2,000 years. Egypt and Rome are two candidates (if we count the Holy Roman Empire as part of the Roman Empire).

This means that the USA could last 2,000 years as a global Empire -- unless it destroys itself from within. If it does, the cause of that inner decay is very easy to detect -- it is the same decay that was there from the very start, namely, the undercurrent of Racism. Some claim that we've solved the problem -- but that's self-deception. The crisis in American schools today is simply a part and parcel of the same old original problem. We Americans like to deceive ourselves.

So, it's really less comfortable to think that the forces that murdered JFK got away with their crime and are still out there, and through their surrogates are still active in local politics today.

You don't have to believe my theory, Paul B. I don't want true-believers. I'm seeking EVIDENCE and FACTS and I'm doing my best to connect the dots. BUT I'M ONLY ONE GUY.

It's important, if we're really going to solve the JFK murder, to pinpoint the exact people who did it. It is useless, IMHO, to just name people without Evidence, simply because they were rich and powerful and hated JFK. That is the easy way out. I'm not looking for the easy way out.

Finally, Paul B., your argument about plausible deniability seems to be genuine, but really it's not very strong. It's simply saying that NOBODY can ever figure it out, and that the CIA modus operandi of plausible deniability is the EASY ANSWER, that is -- they destroyed all the Evidence, and so nobody will ever find it.

That means we can really stop looking -- we can stop trying to solve the JFK murder -- as long as we simply accuse the CIA and stick to that story with our hands over our eyes, ears and mouths.

I have already offered a viable explanation why high-level CIA officers like Helms, Angleton and Dulles were so good at covering-up the murders of their rogue employees -- National Security. The Truth would have led to Civil War, and in 1964 that would have led to World War Three. That's actually a fact, and so it's also a justifiable position. The key was to prevent these people from talking.

As for the ground crew -- they are the key to the resolution of the JFK murder. Nobody has yet named the ground-crew. Whoever names the ground-crew will have taken the key step to identifying the entire Conspiracy.

So, Paul B., on the contrary -- our Democracy is not safe. The Rogues are still on the loose.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited July 30, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[David Andrews]

What was Morales' complaint to Carbajal in Morales' last days? That "they" were going to get him "because I know too much"? He didn't ascribe his fear to having exceeded his mission(s).

[Paul Trejo]

What was Morales' complaint to Carbajal in Morales' last days? That "they" were going to get him "because I know too much"? He didn't ascribe his fear to having exceeded his mission(s).

David, the incident you're recalling is probably this one, which occurred in the Spring of 1973, five years before Morales died. The scene is in southern Arizona, south of Wilcox and near the Mexican border, where David Sanchez Morales was building his retirement home. CIA Chief of Covert Operations, Rocky Farnsworth, held a dinner party in Arizona, and introduced David Morales to his business associate, Bob Walton along with Ruben Carbajal, their wives and some relatives. During that party Morales boasted that that he installed the best security system in the USA in his new house.

Thinking Morales was worried about burglars, Walton said, "What do you need so much security for, you're still 30 miles from Mexico." Morales replied, "I'm not worried about those people, I'm worried about my own."

Walton asked, "What do you mean?" Morales replied, "I know too much," and then he changed the subject.

The dinner party ended up at 11pm, and then the men went off to drink by themselves until daybreak. During that bout, Walton got tired of the small talk so he asked David Morales about himself. Morales began telling his war stories, and becoming animated about it. Morales, for example, is credited for capturing and executing Che Guevarra. Then Morales turned the light back onto Walton. Walton told about his University days, and then at Harvard Law school, when he was head of a student group which invited JFK to speak at Cambridge.

At the mention of JFK, Morales jumped up and shouted, "That no good son of a bitch mother f%*#r! "

Morales screamed about watching his men get slaughtered at the Bay of Pigs, "all because of JFK." Walton says this rant about JFK went on for several minutes as Morales paced up and down the room. Suddenly Morales stopped. Sat down, composed himself. And then, quietly, as if only to himself, he concluded: "Well, we took care of that son of a bitch, didn't we?"

Walton looked at Ruben Carbajal, who just looked back at Walton and nodded his head.

IMHO, the weight of the evidence about David Sanchez Morales is overwhelming. He had means, motive and opportunity. IMHO, Morales is the highest-ranking CIA officer who can be easily linked to the murder of JFK. Others are suspect -- but Morales is virtually certain.

What David Morales lacked could be supplied by fanatic leaders outside of the CIA. For example, Guy Banister, David Ferrie, Clay Shaw, Ed Butler and Carlos Bringuier would supply Lee Harvey Oswald, perfectly framed.

For another example, Ex-General Edwin Walker would supply an organized militia of Minutemen from Dallas, Texas, completely aware of the terrain, and perfectly positioned within the DPD to obtain schedules and other official information without raising suspicion.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited August 1, 2014 by Paul Trejo

[Steven Gaal]

Case for Helms & JJA.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

So, it's really less comfortable to think that the forces that murdered JFK got away with their crime and are still out there, and through their surrogates are still active in local politics today.

You don't have to believe my theory, Paul B. I don't want true-believers. I'm seeking EVIDENCE and FACTS and I'm doing my best to connect the dots. BUT I'M ONLY ONE GUY.

It's important, if we're really going to solve the JFK murder, to pinpoint the exact people who did it. It is useless, IMHO, to just name people without Evidence, simply because they were rich and powerful and hated JFK. That is the easy way out. I'm not looking for the easy way out.

Finally, Paul B., your argument about plausible deniability seems to be genuine, but really it's not very strong. It's simply saying that NOBODY can ever figure it out, and that the CIA modus operandi of plausible deniability is the EASY ANSWER, that is -- they destroyed all the Evidence, and so nobody will ever find it.

That means we can really stop looking -- we can stop trying to solve the JFK murder -- as long as we simply accuse the CIA and stick to that story with our hands over our eyes, ears and mouths.

I have already offered a viable explanation why high-level CIA officers like Helms, Angleton and Dulles were so good at covering-up the murders of their rogue employees -- National Security. The Truth would have led to Civil War, and in 1964 that would have led to World War Three. That's actually a fact, and so it's also a justifiable position. The key was to prevent these people from talking. TREJO

+++

At a RFK COPA meeting in LA was a FBI doc given out cc'ed to CIA. RFK was going to reopen the Elm St case (re RFK own statements (via informant)). I write this because you said below. (GAAL)
(((So, it's really less comfortable to think that the forces that murdered JFK got away with their crime and are still out there, and through their surrogates are still active in local politics today. Trejo)))

#############################

circumstantial evidence is evidence. I write this because you said this below. There are numerous Dulles connections. (see above thread,please let me add the "Party".)

( I'm seeking EVIDENCE and FACTS,TEJO)

How many Dulles connections do we need till we collapse and say this is reality ??? (Gaal)

So they have a party, and while neither Schmidt nor Michael Paine were present, Ruth Paine met Marina Oswald and became fast friends, while it would take a while longer for Michael Paine to meet Lee Harvey Oswald.

In a footnote, (p. 353), Epstein notes: “Kuetemeyer had been experimenting, according to Schmidt, on a group of schidoids during World War II. The experiments had been interrupted in 1944, when Kuetemeyer had become involved in the plot to assassinate Hitler and had been forced into hiding from the Nazis.”

Dr. Whilhelm Keutemeyer was a professor of psychosomatic medicine and religion at the University of Heidelberg, Germany. Keutemeyer’s son was Volkmar Schmidt’s best friend, and Schmidt looked to Keutemeyer as a surrogate father figure. Keutemeyer was also a colleague of Swiss psychoanalysist Carl Jung, who attempted to use his professional associations in attempts to influence Hitler’s behavior. When that failed they just tried to kill him.

According to Schmidt, Keutemeyer was also associated with Herr Von Halen and Dr. Adam von Trott zu Solz, both of whom were captured, tortured and executed because of their roles in the failed assassination and coup of July 20, 1944. (For details of their roles Peter Hoffman’s the History of German Resistance, 1933-1944, MIT Press, 1977).

Also involved was one Dr. Hans Bernd Gisevius, a Gestapo officer assigned to Switzerland, who tried to get the OSS chief of Bern, Allen Dulles, to broker a separate peace between Germany and the Western Allies, without Hitler, to fight the Russians together. This plot evolved into the July 20th bomb explosion at the Fuhrer’s “Wolfschanze” bunker headquarters near Rastenburg, Germany.

Col. Claus Schenk Grav von Stauffenberg planted a briefcase bomb under the map table next to Hitler, left the bunker, witnessed the explosion and the flew back to Berlin where he met with Gisevius. Together they drew up press releases to counter Goebel’s propaganda, but when it became clear that the bomb failed to kill Hitler (the heavy wooden table leg saved his life), those responsible were rounded up and executed. Many hundreds, some say thousands were eventually implicated, but somehow, Gisevius went underground and eventually escaped using false identification provided to him by Allen Dulles, though his personal assistant Mary Bancroft.

Mary Bancroft, the stepdaughter of the publisher of the Wall Street Journal, was also Dulles’ mistress at the time, and served as a intermediary between Dulles and Gisevius. She also helped Gisevius translate his history of the Third Rich, later published as “Bis zum bittern Ende.” (two volumes, Fretz & Wasmuth, Zurich, 1946, 1954; To the Bitter End,” Richard and Clara Winston, Jonathan Cape, London, 1948; Rutten & Loening, Hamburg, (1964).

As related in her own “Autobiography of a Spy” (William Morrow, 1983), Mary Bancroft was a close personal friend of Michael Paine’s mother Ruth Forbes Paine Young. Their intimate friendship dated from the 1920s when Ruth Forbes Paine was married to New York architect Lyman Paine, one of the founders of the Trotyskite movment in the U.S. and father of Michael Paine. Bancroft and Ruth Forbes Paine traveled extensively overseas and were together on board an ocean liner when Bancroft met her future husband, a Zurich businessman.

Hans Bernd Gisevius was called to testify for the defense at the Nurenberg trials, but instead of aiding them, he helped send the Nazis to the gallows. He then came to America where Allen Dulles provided him with a $5,000 a month retainer and set him up in the home of his CIA deputy Tom Braden. At the time Braden was head of the International Organizations Division (IOD), and his assistant was Cord Meyer, Jr., who would later take his place. Cord Meyer, Jr. was the co-founder of the World Federalists, which also included it’s Philadelphia adherents, Michael’s mother Ruth Forbes Paine Young and Priscilla Johnson McMillan, when she was a student at Bryn Mawr.

So there you have it - Dr. Wilhelm Keutemeyer, Dr. Hans Bernd Gisevius, Mary Bancroft and Allen Dulles, four direct participants in the July 20, 1944 Hitler assassination attempt and failed coup d’etat, who also became related to the events that culminated in what happened on November 22, 1963.

=======================================

First National Bank of Boston owned by the Cabots controlled Textron which controlled Bell Helicopter. Textron went to the Pentagon lobbying in 1958 for increased Helicopter use in warfare. The Vietnam war AKA the Helicopter War. Michael Paine worked at Bell Helicopter and was a Cabot on both sides of his family.

• Michael Paine...was sixth in descent from Robert Treat Paine the signer of the Declaration of Independence. His mother Ruth Forbes was a great-granddaughter of Emerson and a granddaughter of William Hathaway Forbes, founder and first president of the American Bell Telephone Company. Her father, Ralph Emerson Forbes, left an estate of $2.5 million when he died in 1937. Her uncle, W. Cameron Forbes, a former Ambassador to Japan, had been until his recent demise a director of United Fruit....Michael's great-great-great-uncle, Robert Bennet Forbes, is said by the Dictionary of American Biography to have played "a prominent role in the outbreak of the Chinese Opium War." Robert's mother was a Perkins, of a family who were partners in the "most powerful American house in China." ...Michael Paine was descended from the Cabots on both his father's and his mother's side; he was thus a second cousin once removed of Thomas Dudley Cabot, the former President of United Fruit who offered another of his companies, Gibralter Steamship, as a "cover" for the CIA during the Bay of Pigs adventure. He was also a cousin of Cabot's partner, Alexander Cochrane Forbes, a director of United Fruit and trustee of Cabot, Cabot and Forbes. Paul F. Hellmuth vice-president of Cabot, Cabot and Forbes, was a trustee of the J. Frederick Brown Foundation, a CIA "conduit", along with G.C. Cabot. Thus the Paine family [had] links with the blue-blood intelligence circles of the "Oh So Social" OSS and CIA, though one would not guess this from their description in the Warren Report...
  • ###########################
    • The station had been told by headquarters that the man in the photographs was not Oswald. On 9 October, a few days after the photographs were taken, the station alerted CIA headquarters to the visit of the man claiming to be Oswald: “Have photos male appears be American entering Sovemb 1216 hours, leaving 1222 on 1 Oct. apparent age 35, athletic build, circa 6 feet, receding hairline.” Headquarters consulted the genuine photographs and personal information in its file on the defector. It replied by cable the next day, stating that, on the contrary, the 23–year–old “Oswald is five feet ten inches, one hundred sixty–five pounds, light brown wavy hair, blue eyes."
      ==
      The reply from CIA headquarters is available online at http://www.ourmaninmexico.com/documents_oswald.html. Despite sending this truthful description to Mexico City, CIA headquarters passed on the incorrect description to the FBI, the Navy, and the State Department; see Newman, op. cit., pp.398f.
      ==
      • Not only were individuals within the CIA’s headquarters and Mexico City office aware of Oswald’s identity, but they were of course aware also of the significance of a US citizen making contact with communist officials. According to one of the CIA officers who helped to issue the cable from headquarters to Mexico City on 10 October, the reply revealed that the agency possessed “a keen interest in Oswald on a need–to–know basis” just six weeks before President Kennedy’s assassination
      See Jefferson Morley, ‘What Jane Roman Said, part 3’ at history–matters.com. CIA headquarters obscured its “keen interest in Oswald” by withholding from the Mexico City station the fact that it was aware of the incriminating activities which Oswald had undertaken in New Orleans a few weeks before his trip to Mexico City. For more about Oswald’s apparent undercover work in New Orleans, see The Career of Lee Harvey Oswald.
      ==
      Bill Simpich, State Secret: Wiretapping in Mexico City, Double Agents, and the Framing of Lee Oswald, was published at the www.maryferrell.org website.

      The description of Lee Oswald sent by CIA headquarters to its Mexico City office on 10 October was: “five feet ten inches, one hundred sixty–five pounds, light brown wavy hair, blue eyes”. Simpich points out that this description was not entirely correct, and that other descriptions of Oswald in official files prior to the assassination were also incorrect, but in different ways. In some files, his name is given as Lee Henry Oswald; in others he is said to have acquired Soviet citizenship. In this example it is Oswald’s weight that is incorrect. On the day of his arrest, Oswald weighed 131 pounds, not 165.21

      This series of inaccurate files was generated by the CIA’s internal counter–intelligence department, which hoped to identify moles within the CIA and the FBI by noting where particular items of incorrect information surfaced. Although not sinister in itself, (But COULD BE. Bad information could let slip patsy into Dallas,GAAL) this is further proof that Oswald was being followed closely by elements within the CIA long before the assassination.

      It may or may not be coincidental that this particular item of incorrect information surfaced very soon after the assassination, twice:

      • Within fifteen minutes of the shooting in Dealey Plaza, a bystander described the gunman to the Dallas police as a “slender white male about 30, 5 feet 10, 165”. The description is unlikely to be genuine: the bystander would not have been able to ascertain the gunman’s height or weight merely by glimpsing the upper half of his body from the street below, and the most obvious and distinctive aspect of the gunman’s appearance, his clothes, are not mentioned. The bystander was never identified.
        • The same description was given to a police officer at the scene of Officer J.D. Tippit’s murder, again by an unidentified member of the public: “a white male about 5′ 10″, weighing 160 to 170 pounds … brown bushy hair”.
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
        http://www.history-matters.com/essays/frameup/WhatJaneRomanSaid/WhatJaneRomanSaid_6.htm

        The new records suggested George Joannides was one such SAS operative. The reason for his interest? The bulk of the available evidence indicates that Joannides in late 1963 was running a psychological warfare operation designed to link Lee Harvey Oswald to the Castro government without disclosing the CIA’s hand.

        George E. Joannides (pronounced “Joe-uh-NEE-deez”) is a new and important character in the Kennedy assassination story. The son of a well-known Greek-American newspaper columnist in New York City, he went to law school and joined the CIA in 1951. Joannides, fluent in Greek and French, was sent to the Athens station. By 1963, he was 40 years old, a rising protégé of Tom Karamessines. He was highly regarded for his skills in political action, propaganda and psychological warfare operations. A dapper, witty man, Joannides presented himself publicly as a Defense Department lawyer. In fact, in 1963 he was Dick Helms’ man in Miami.
        ==

        A keen interest in Oswald

        The agency’s interest in Oswald in late 1963, Roman explained, was the result of his involvement with the pro-Castro Fair Play for Cuba Committee, often known by its acronym, FPCC. The agency had wiretap transcripts proving that the FPCC was funded by the Cuban government, via Castro’s delegation at the United Nations in New York. It was Oswald’s FPCC activities that most interested the counterintelligence staff in 1963, she said.

        Newman then reviewed the routing slips on two documents about Oswald that Roman herself had received in September 1963.

        The first was the FBI report from agent Hosty in Dallas. Hosty reported on Oswald’s address in the summer of 1963 and his recent leftist political activities, including his subscription to the Socialist Worker newspaper.

        The second report was more provocative. It was a report from the FBI in New Orleans, dated September 23, 1963. Oswald, it seemed, had gotten arrested. He had been handing out FPCC pamphlets on a street corner in New Orleans on August 9, 1963 when he was confronted by some members of the militantly anti-Castro group called the Directorio Revolucionario Estudantil or DRE, which was known to North American newspaper readers as the Cuban Student Directorate. An altercation ensued. Oswald and some of the Cubans were arrested. An agent in the New Orleans office of the FBI wrote up a report and sent it to Washington.

        The FBI, it should be noted, was not the only organization interested in Oswald’s political activities. The Cuban students were also collecting intelligence on the young ex-Marine.

        The Cuban Student Directorate, long since forgotten, was among the most prominent anti-Castro organizations of the day. Composed of exiled middle-class students from the University of Havana, the Directorate rallied young people in Miami against Castro’s communist movement. It won headlines around the world for sensational actions such as attempting to assassinate Castro outside a Havana hotel in August 1962. At CIA headquarters in Langley the group was known by the code name AMSPELL. With the U.S. support, the Directorate flourished and established chapters in cities throughout North and South America in the early 1960s.

        The Directorate followed up on Oswald’s antics just as the FBI did. In August 1963, the New Orleans delegation of the group reported to the Directorate’s headquarters in Miami that a Castro supporter named Oswald was trying to infiltrate their ranks. The Directorate leaders in Miami authorized the New Orleans chapter to issue a press release denouncing Oswald’s pro-Castro ways. The New Orleans students also challenged Oswald to a debate on a local radio program. When Oswald accepted they made a tape of his remarks criticizing U.S. policy toward Cuba.

        Of course, none of this was in the FBI records. At the time of our interview with Jane Roman, Newman and I knew only that the Directorate had received funding from the CIA under a program with the code name of AMSPELL. There was, it turns out, much more to know. All we had was the FBI report on the arrest of Oswald and his antagonists in the Cuban Student Directorate that was forwarded to the CIA. The routing slip showed that Roman signed for it on October 4, 1963.

        Newman recounted the circumstances in which she signed for the report. Five weeks after his brawl with the Cuban Student Directorate in New Orleans, Oswald had caught a bus to Mexico City where he visited both the Cuban and Russian diplomatic offices seeking a visa. The CIA surveillance team watching two offices figured out the visitor’s name was Lee Oswald. The surveillance team reported their finding to David Atlee Phillips, the chief of Cuban operations in Mexico City. Phillips notified his boss, Win Scott, the chief of the Mexico City station. On October 8, 1963, Scott sent a cable to headquarters in Washington asking for more information about Oswald. Two days later, headquarters sent a response.

        This was the next document that Newman gave to Roman for her perusal. She had helped prepare it thirty-one years before.

        This three-page cable, dated October 10, 1963, seems innocuous. It was drafted by a woman named Charlotte Bustos. She worked on the Mexico desk of the CIA. It was her job to handle such routine inquiries. She did this by checking to see if the agency had ever opened a so-called 201 file on anyone named Lee Oswald. (A 201 file, sometimes known as a personality file, is opened on anybody of interest to the agency.) Because of his defection to the Soviet Union in 1959, Oswald already had a 201 file at CIA headquarters. Bustos reviewed it and drafted a reply. By the end of the workday on October 10, 1963, her draft had been revised by other CIA offices for coordination, authentication, and approval. No CIA cable could go out with such vetting.

        The markings at the bottom of the document indicated which offices and which officers had been consulted. Jane Roman was identified as one of the officers who had seen in the cable “in draft form.” The cable was also seen by an “authenticating officer” whose task it was to vouch for its contents. That was J.C. King, the chief of all CIA operations in the Western Hemisphere. Finally, the cable had to be signed by a “releasing officer” who approved the policy contents of the message. That was Tom Karamessines, who served as top deputy to covert operations chief, Richard Helms.

        At 10:28 p.m. on the night of Wednesday, October 10, 1963, the cable went to Mexico City.

        Partisans of the anti-conspiratorial interpretation of Kennedy’s death stress that this cable was routine. It certainly seems to be, despite the hour at which it was sent. In the cable, Karamessines passed on to Mexico City what the agency purported to know about Lee Oswald: that he had defected to the Soviet Union in October 1959, that he had married a Russian woman, and that he had moved back to the United States in the spring of 1962. The cable stated that the “latest HDQS [headquarters] info[rmation]” about this young American was a State Department report from May 1962, which stated that his time in the Soviet Union had “a maturing effect” on him.

        In the interview, Newman called Roman’s attention to this seemingly minor statement.

        “It’s not even a little bit untrue,” he noted bluntly. “It’s grossly untrue.”

        The juxtaposition was clear.

        On the table was one cable which showed that Roman had signed off on the statement that the “latest HDQS info” on Oswald was a report from State Department report dated May 1962.

        On top of that cable was the cable and routing slip that showed she had just a few days before signed for the two FBI reports on this same Lee Harvey Oswald. She had signed for the second of these reports on Oct. 4, 1963.

        Newman’s implication was clear. If Roman had read the FBI reports, then she knew on October 10, 1963 that Oswald had just a few weeks earlier been handing out pamphlets on behalf of the FPCC, the most prominent pro-Castro organization in the United States. Moreover, Oswald’s pro-Castro activism had embroiled him in an altercation with members of the Cuban Student Directorate, one of the agency’s most favored front groups in the anti-Castro cause. All of this information was on Jane Roman’s desk in October 1963.

        The logical conclusion: On October 10, 1963 the “latest HDQS info” on Oswald wasn’t a 17-month old State Department memo speculating about Oswald’s state of mind. It was a month-old FBI document about Oswald’s contacts with a CIA-sponsored organization. And Jane Roman—if she had done her job—had known it.

        Roman thought carefully about what Newman was suggesting. Her response was telling. She didn’t deny that she had read the FBI reports on Oswald. She couldn’t--not with her initials on the routing slips.

        Instead, Roman spoke about who had responsibility for the handling the contents of a cable about Oswald. She said the responsibility did not belong to CI/LS but to another office in the agency’s Directorate of Plans: the Special Affairs Staff (SAS). She was precise on why the cable didn’t it mention Oswald’s most recent activities, namely his clash with the anti-Castro Cubans in New Orleans.

        “The only interpretation I could put on this [the language of the cable] would that this SAS group would have held all the information on Oswald under their tight control,” she said.

        In the fall of 1963, the SAS was a new bureaucratic entity in the CIA. Created at the behest of the Kennedy White House, it was tasked with overthrowing of the government of Cuba without too much “noise,” meaning domestic political consequences. It was the bureaucratic incarnation of John and Robert Kennedy’s secret but abiding determination to remove Fidel Castro from power. It was created after the Cuban missile crisis of October 1962 was resolved. When the showdown over Soviet missiles in Cuba ended peacefully, Castro’s grip on power was stronger than ever.

        Some thought JFK had squandered an opportunity to get rid of Castro. Others thought he had acted prudently. There was consensus that Operation Mongoose, the Kennedy brothers’ first covert program to oust the charismatic communist, was going nowhere. The SAS was created in January 1963 to take over the job. As for tactics, the Kennedy brothers didn’t care what SAS did as long as the White House had plausible deniability. The SAS operatives tried everything from assassination conspiracies to propaganda to political action to “psychological warfare,” the contemporary term of art for espionage that deceived and disoriented and divided the communists. Along the way, some of the SAS men became interested in the very obscure character named Lee Harvey Oswald.

        At least that was Jane Roman’s reading of the cables.

        These SAS men were being very careful with what they knew about Oswald. Under their tight control. Roman stressed that she was not privy to such things. She said that, for the counterintelligence staff, running such a check on a then-unknown personality like Oswald was simply mundane duty.

        “All these things that you have shown me so far before the assassination would have been very dull and very routine,” she said.

        That was very likely true, and Newman didn’t dispute it. He stressed a different point: that Roman, having read the FBI cables on Oswald and having seen the draft form of the cable to Mexico City, personally knew that the line about “latest HDQS info” on Oswald was not entirely accurate.

        “You had to know that this sentence here was not correct,” Newman said.

        “Well, I had thousands of these things,” Roman protested.

        “I’m willing to accept whatever your explanation is,” Newman allowed, “ but I have to ask you this--”

        Roman was getting testy.

        “And I wasn’t in on any particular goings-on or hanky-panky as far as the Cuban situation,” she added.

        “Right, so you wouldn’t have”--Newman groped for the right words, “what you’re saying is” He finished the thought: “…tried to examine it that closely?”

        “Yeah, I mean, this is all routine as far as I was concerned,” she answered.

        “Problem though, here,” Newman noted. He pointed to the line in the cable about “latest HDQS info.”

        Roman understood his point and finally conceded it: “Yeah, I mean I’m signing off on something that I know isn’t true.”

        I’m signing off on something that I know isn’t true.

        This was doubly interesting. Roman was not only acknowledging not only was somebody in SAS interested in Oswald six weeks before Kennedy was killed. She was stating that whoever that somebody was made an affirmative decision to withhold information about him from other CIA officers before November 22, 1963.

        Newman did not dwell on the point. He did not imply that Roman was involved in anything sinister. She was merely saying that she participated in drafting a cable in which the men higher up in the clandestine operations division chose not to tell the whole truth—something that was in the nature of their jobs.

        Responsibility for the cable on Oswald, Roman said, belonged to the most senior officer who signed it, Tom Karamessines.

        She was no doubt correct. Karamessines was Dick Helms’ right hand man. While Helms was sleek and bland, an Ivy Leaguer who was barbered to the nines and kept a clean desk, Karamessines was an earthy assimilated New Yorker. He had distinguished himself as a frontline soldier in the vicious Greek civil war of 1946-48. He went on to become the chief of the CIA station in Athens, the largest outpost of U.S. intelligence in the Near East. There he recruited a large number of Greek-Americans to work for the agency. In March 1962, Helms made him his top assistant and trusted him totally.(Greek mechanics ?? ,Prouty)

        ============

        see

        http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21126&p=288603

        ===

        FOR more JJA see Probe JJA parts I & II

Edited July 31, 2014 by Steven Gaal

[Paul Trejo]

Case for Helms & JJA.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

How many Dulles connections do we need till we collapse and say this is reality ??? (Gaal)

Steven, it seems to me that you're pursuing the John Newman argument about a "shadow government" conspiracy, with all its gaps, toward a conclusion.

Yet there isn't enough information to draw a conclusion in Newman's data. He admitted he had to guess in places to fill up gaps. As long as one includes blatant guesses, one's conclusions cannot be certain. This is the kind of logic that convicted Lee Harvey Oswald of being the Lone Assassin.

There seems to be a vague consensus among many here on the FORUM about some murky "shadow government" conspiracy. I'm calling for the opposite -- for names and dates and places.

I was disappointed that Gaeton Fonzi gave up his exploration of the Cuban connection when he did. He should have kept digging. Also, I was disappointed when Joan Mellen concluded that Fred Crisman, David Ferrie, Jack S. Martin and Thomas Edward Beckham actually represented the official CIA in the JFK murder.

Those low-level quasi-assets had no pull at all in the CIA. So, Joan Mellen was really repeating Jim Garrison's findings -- which were disappointing on their own account. (Don't get me wrong -- I'm not dismissing Jim Garrison's mammoth contribution, except to say that he failed to solve the case, and fell back into a "shadow government" theory.)

I'm more impressed with Larry Hancock and Bill Simpich, who make it a point to demand hard evidence, documented evidence, before they level charges. This is the level at which I prefer to operate. Now, I still don't agree with all of their conclusions -- for one thing, they also admit that they are guessing here and there, to fill in the gaps.

But at least they admit it when they're guessing.

When we have personal confessions of the principals, we are on solid ground. We have personal confessions from David Morales, John Martino, Frank Sturgis and Howard Hunt. That's solid. We can take that to the bank, IMHO.

However, when we reach higher than that in the CIA, we are on shakier ground. David Atlee Phillips gave us a near-confession, when he admitted to his brother that he was in Dealey Plaza when JFK was murdered -- but he stopped short of admitting participation. Later, in his book, THE NIGHT WATCH (1982) Phillips said that he was involved in training Lee Harvey Oswald to murder FIdel Castro, but then Oswald got diverted (behind his back) into the plot to murder JFK.

So -- that's not a complete match, Steven. I still can't nail David Atlee Phillips based on the evidence we have so far.

As for James Jesus Angleton, it seems clear to me now, after the work by Bill Simpich which proved that a mole-hunt was started inside the CIA for the impersonators of Oswald and Duran at the Mexico City Cuban consulate, that Angleton had no idea what David Morales was up to. Angleton was indeed trying to murder Fidel Castro, but the mole-hunt facts and figures exonerate Angleton from the JFK murder, IMHO, based on the evidence I've seen so far.

The same applies to anybody at the level of Angleton or higher, including Richard Helms and John McCone. They are in the clear BASED ON THE DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE THAT HAS BEEN PUT FORTH SO FAR. Suspicion won't change my mind, Steven. Only documented evidence will do that. And in this regard I continue to praise the efforts of Hancock and Simpich.

I'm now starting to propose names for the ground-crew. David Morales; Frank Sturgis; Howard Hunt; John Martino; Johnny Roselli; Guy Banister; David Ferrie; Clay Shaw; Ed Butler; Carlos Bringuier; Fred Crisman; Tom Beckham; Jack Martin; Edwin Walker; Roscoe White; J.D. Tippit; Vidal Santiago; Loran Hall; Larry Howard; Eladio del Valle and Gerry Patrick Hemming.

As time goes forward I'll add to this list perhaps subtract from it -- but the documented evidence (and personal confessions) that I have so far has led me to this current status of my theory.

I also add an element that I believe Larry Hancock would approve, namely, photographic evidence. I never considered J.D. Tippit a suspect before, until I saw very recent photographic evidence regarding the Badge Man. I was astonished - down to the birthmark on his face.

My point, Steven, is that the highest CIA guy that I can name so far is David Morales. Clearly a rogue. If you can find documented evidence (and not mere suspicion) of a confession, a smoking gun, a contradiction with no other explanation, then I'll change my tune about the CIA.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited August 1, 2014 by Paul Trejo