Pat Speer on Black Op: The HSCA testimony of Thomas Canning

[Pat Speer]

FWIW, David is right. The SBT was not made necessary by Tague, but by the WC staff's study of the Z-film, which convinced the staff that Kennedy and Connally reacted too close together for them to have been hit by separate shots.

Pat,

According to Mr. Tidd, the FBI said that Connally and Kennedy were hit by separate shots, and that the WC disagreed with the FBI on this.

On what, if anything, did the FBI base its belief?

Just wondering: What's the chance that a bullet from a 6.5 Mannlicher-Carcano could penetrate and exit a human head like that and still have enough momentum to cause the injury which Tague sustained?

--Tommy

The FBI's theory of three shots/three hits was developed within days of the shooting, after Connally described that scenario on TV. They then tried to make that scenario fit the Z-film. This led them to realize that the three shots were fired too close together to have been fired by a single shooter. So they moved the final shot down the road a bit and stretched out the scenario. They didn't expect the WC to ever double-check this. When they did, however, they came to realize that the first two shots were too close together to have been fired by a single-assassin. And so--voila--the WC came to conclude there were two hits and a miss, and that gee golly they just couldn't decide which one missed.

[Paul Trejo]

The FBI's theory of three shots/three hits was developed within days of the shooting, after Connally described that scenario on TV. They then tried to make that scenario fit the Z-film. This led them to realize that the three shots were fired too close together to have been fired by a single shooter. So they moved the final shot down the road a bit and stretched out the scenario. They didn't expect the WC to ever double-check this. When they did, however, they came to realize that the first two shots were too close together to have been fired by a single-assassin. And so--voila--the WC came to conclude there were two hits and a miss, and that gee golly they just couldn't decide which one missed.

Well, Pat, I'm less concerned about the differences between the original FBI reports and the WC report because of the dynamics and vicissitudes involved.

1. According to Professor David Wrone (1999) J. Edgar Hoover came up with the "Lone Shooter" theory before 3pm CST on 11/22/1963, in Washington DC

2. Shortly before 3pm CST on 11/22/1963, McGeorge Bundy called LBJ from Washington DC, to say that a "Lone Shooter" had killed JFK.

3. When LBJ returned to Washington, he told J. Edgar Hoover, 'I have more faith in your judgment than anybody else in town.' LBJ also added, 'I don't want to get you involved personally, but I'd like to adopt your opinion as my own.'

4. Later in the week, LBJ drafted a reluctant Senator Richard Russell into the Warren Commission, saying words to the effect of, 'All you need to do is evaluate a report that Hoover and the FBI have already made.'

5. In the first few days of the Warren Report, J. Edgar Hoover had to talk with the prospective attorneys for the Warren Commission -- Joe Ball, Wes Liebeler and Al Jenner -- and actually tell them that he was NOT convinced of a "Lone Shooter" but that was a determination that THEY were charged to make.

6. That is, these were professor attorneys with standard practices and some professional pride. They were NOT going to enter the Warren Commission on the basis that they had to agree with J. Edgar Hoover's "Lone Nut" scenario -- NOT AT FIRST.

7. Nine months is a very long time for one murder case. The WC attorneys were charged with investigating "every possible lead, every rumor," even the thin ones, assembling all the data, and weighing the evidence. In other words, in procedure it would appear to be exactly like any other fair trial.

8. Only in the course of the unfolding months of 1964 did it dawn on Ball, Liebeler and Jenner that they were severely constrained by the Hoover "Lone Shooter" mandate.

9. This became clear when leak after leak was sent to the US Press, showing Lee Harvey Oswald, again and again, to be the "Lone Shooter." A good case in point would be the 21 February 1963 issue of LIFE magazine, showing OSWALD on the front cover in one of the famous "Backyard Photographs."

10. By the end of the Warren Commission hearings, the key attorneys and staff knew that Hoover's "Lone Shooter" mandate had been the guiding light. FBI data had been twisted violently to force it into the "Lone Shooter" scenario. That was finally obvious. They were forced to accept it, though, by LBJ and the call to National Security.

11. It was obvious to them -- but it still wasn't obvious to all of the attorneys of the Warren Commission, even towards the end. For example, Burt Griffin still believed that he was working on an objective, unbiased case.

12. In conclusion, the "Lone Shooter" mandate from J. Edgar Hoover to all FBI Agents was only slowly trickled down to the Warren Commission attorneys. Only LBJ, Warren, Dulles and Hoover knew about it from the very start.

13. Even Senator Richard Russell thought that there was some room for individual evaluation, and he refused to sign the Warren Commission Report unless his dissenting opinion (about the Single-Bullet nonsense) was published in an Appendix. This was agreed -- but after getting his signature, Russell's dissenting opinion was removed -- on grounds of National Security.

14. The justification for the "Lone Shooter" mandate remains the same today as it did in 1964, namely, National Security. The TRUTH about Lee Harvey Oswald would be released in 75 years from the publication of the WCR -- in October, 2039. In 1992, President GHW Bush signed the JFK Records Acts, moving that date to October, 2017.

15. What mammoth historical change made this change of date possible? It could only be the fall of the Berlin Wall and the USSR. This should tell us why we had a National Security ban on the OSWALD data in the first place; i.e. the JFK killers were the American far-right -- and to let the American people attack our far-right would have weakened the USA during the Cold War. After the Cold War, the National Security ban on the OSWALD data became less urgent.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited March 30, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Brad Milch]

I like former Justice Department attorney John T. Orr's take on what Mr. Trejo lays out above. Mr. Orr states in the gunshot analysis report that he submitted to Janet Reno (downloadable at the Fox news JFK 50 website) that the WC's report basically said, 'we don't know how Oswald did it, but WE KNOW HE DID IT'.

Other takes I've read include Gerald Ford snitching to Hoover on the WC's progress & informing Hoover that the 3 shots/3hits explanation of the ambush just wouldn't sell once the Z-film got unlocked & viewed by criminalists & other experts. Ford supposedly got the WC off the hook of facing Hoover's wrath for going against his Dec 1963 report & producing a more 'sellable' piece of garbage.

The WC Report took the heat for the public backlash of the then Government's explanation of JFK's death, not Hoover's Report or LBJ. Hoover's Report isn't even in the WC Report.

Some (like me) find it strange that the WC did publish WCD 298, that clearly shows visually that Hoover's FBI was lying about the shooting from the get go. Was publishing that FBI initial analysis a mistake or the WC's trump card to use if Hoover messed with any of the commissioners or their staff following the disbanding of the WC? Maybe.

Back in 1964, no one bucked Hoover if they expected to live a normal life unless the possibility of Hoover retaliation had been smoothed over first.

From Pat Speer's website I have learned that Hoover was leaking out to the public what he wanted & bypassed the WC in the process. WC or not, the public was still being 'Hooverized'.

BM

Edited April 2, 2015 by Brad Milch

[Paul Trejo]

I like former Justice Department attorney John T. Orr's take on what Mr. Trejo lays out above. Mr. Orr states in the gunshot analysis report that he submitted to Janet Reno (downloadable at the Fox news JFK 50 website) that the WC's report basically said, 'we don't know how Oswald did it, but WE KNOW HE DID IT'.

Other takes I've read include Gerald Ford snitching to Hoover on the WC's progress & informing Hoover that the 3 shots/3hits explanation of the ambush just wouldn't sell once the Z-film got unlocked & viewed by criminalists & other experts. Ford supposedly got the WC off the hook of facing Hoover's wrath for going against his Dec 1963 report & producing a more 'sellable' piece of garbage.

The WC Report took the heat for the public backlash of the then Government's explanation of JFK's death, not Hoover's Report or LBJ. Hoover's Report isn't even in the WC Report.

Some (like me) find it strange that the WC did publish WCD 298, that clearly shows visually that Hoover's FBI was lying about the shooting from the get go. Was publishing that FBI initial analysis a mistake or the WC's trump card to use if Hoover messed with any of the commissioners or their staff following the disbanding of the WC? Maybe.

Back in 1964, no one bucked Hoover if they expected to live a normal life unless the possibility of Hoover retaliation had been smoothed over first.

From Pat Speer's website I have learned that Hoover was leaking out to the public what he wanted & bypassed the WC in the process. WC or not, the public was still being 'Hooverized'.

BM

Well, Brad, who can blame former Justice Department attorney John T. Orr for submitting his gunshot analysis report to Janet Reno with the general conclusion: 'we don't know how Oswald did it, but WE KNOW HE DID IT'.

What evidence did he have to go on? There was Oswald's rifle on the 6th floor, with three spent shells. Didn't that prove the case right there? Also, why did Oswald flee the scene of the crime? Also, why did Oswald put up a fight when surrounded by policemen at the Texas Theater?

No other viable suspects were found. The weapon itself tied things up. Besides that, the ballistics evidence that the FBI shared with the Warren Commission was miniscule -- only those fragments from that weapon were submitted -- and evidence from JFK's brain, autopsy report and X-rays were horribly compromised and sharply curtailed.

Based on the evidence that the FBI (deliberately) shared with the Warren Commission -- what other concusion could be drawn? Clearly, Lee Harvey Oswald appeared to be, indeed, the "Lone Shooter" that Hoover claimed he was.

Yet Orr was honest enough to admit, "We don't know how Oswald did it." Because actually, the evidence for a "Lone Shooter" is incomplete, fragmented, and frustrating. No wonder Earl Warren said that the actual facts would be revealed to the American public only in 75 years from the date of the Warren Report.

Therefore, it's not so strange to see that the Warren Commission published CE-399, the magic bullet, that clearly shows that Warren was uncommitted to his "truth" about Lee Harvey Oswald. It was neither a mistake nor a "trump card" by Warren, but a frank admission that the evidence must remain incomplete until 75 years have passed.

It was indeed a matter of National Security in 1964 to maintain the "Lone Shooter" and the SBT -- and so the FBI had no problem stomping on anybody who challenged Hoover (as well as Warren, LBJ and Dulles) on this point.

Nor did Hoover fully trust Earl Warren to fully control his staff -- proud attorneys who only knew how to seek promote the truth -- so Hoover and the FBI continually leaked "Lone Shooter" evidence to the mass media all throughout 1964.

It was a lie -- and actually Earl Warren honestly admitted that it was a lie. Thanks to President GHW Bush, however, we won't have to wait until 2039 to learn the Truth about Oswald -- instead, we must only wait until 26 October 1963.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited April 3, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Brad Milch]

I stumbled into the reality of the situation you described quite innocently in the mid '1960's, Paul. I used my paper route earnings to buy 'Six Seconds In Dallas' & gave an oral book report on it in class (around 10th grade). Motivation for the paper route = father who didn't grant allowances (spoiling kids wasn't his thing).

Humping a bike load of papers in the freezing snow near Seattle at 5 in the morning on a school day wasn't very glamorous. I had some spectacular early morning wipe outs that no one witnessed (fortunately).

After the class I gave the oral report in, I was lectured for promoting communist propaganda & disobedience to the USA, not to mention throwing the school into jeopardy of becoming a victim of Hoover's suspicions & wrath. How dare I suggest the high & mighty Hoover & his FBI of incompetence?

My father's take on the JFK assassination at the time: rich bastards get what they deserve.

As I remember, the Beatles, Monkees & Stones were the thing at the time. After the oral report, I started getting sent to the vice-principal's office for haircut infractions & sent home to obtain what the school found 'acceptable' on a routine basis. The short marine style haircuts so common today I adopted just to get school administrators off me. Long hair on guys loving girlies found me repulsive as a result.

Thanks, Josiah Thompson.

Sheez.

BM

Edited April 2, 2015 by Brad Milch

[Pat Speer]

I like former Justice Department attorney John T. Orr's take on what Mr. Trejo lays out above. Mr. Orr states in the gunshot analysis report that he submitted to Janet Reno (downloadable at the Fox news JFK 50 website) that the WC's report basically said, 'we don't know how Oswald did it, but WE KNOW HE DID IT'.

Other takes I've read include Gerald Ford snitching to Hoover on the WC's progress & informing Hoover that the 3 shots/3hits explanation of the ambush just wouldn't sell once the Z-film got unlocked & viewed by criminalists & other experts. Ford supposedly got the WC off the hook of facing Hoover's wrath for going against his Dec 1963 report & producing a more 'sellable' piece of garbage.

The WC Report took the heat for the public backlash of the then Government's explanation of JFK's death, not Hoover's Report or LBJ. Hoover's Report isn't even in the WC Report.

Some (like me) find it strange that the WC did publish WCD 298, that clearly shows visually that Hoover's FBI was lying about the shooting from the get go. Was publishing that FBI initial analysis a mistake or the WC's trump card to use if Hoover messed with any of the commissioners or their staff following the disbanding of the WC? Maybe.

Back in 1964, no one bucked Hoover if they expected to live a normal life unless the possibility of Hoover retaliation had been smoothed over first.

From Pat Speer's website I have learned that Hoover was leaking out to the public what he wanted & bypassed the WC in the process. WC or not, the public was still being 'Hooverized'.

BM

Well, Brad, who can blame former Justice Department attorney John T. Orr for submitting his gunshot analysis report to Janet Reno with the general conclusion: 'we don't know how Oswald did it, but WE KNOW HE DID IT'.

What evidence did he have to go on? There was Oswald's rifle in the 6th floor, with three spent shells. Didn't that prove the case right there? Also, why did Oswald flee the scene of the crime? Also, why did Oswald put up a fight when surrounded by policemen at the Texas Theater?

No other viable suspects were found. The weapon itself tied things up. Besides that, the ballistics evidence that the FBI shared with the Warren Commission was miniscule -- only those fragments from that weapon were submitted -- and evidence from JFK's brain, autopsy report and X-rays were horribly compromised and sharply curtailed.

Based on the evidence that the FBI (deliberately) shared with the Warren Commission -- what other concusion could be drawn? Clearly, Lee Harvey Oswald appeared to be, indeed, the "Lone Shooter" that Hoover claimed he was.

Yet Orr was honest enough to admit, "We don't know how Oswald did it." Because actually, the evidence for a "Lone Shooter" is incomplete, fragmented, and frustrating. No wonder Earl Warren said that the actual facts would be revealed to the American public only in 75 years from the date of the Warren Report.

Therefore, it's not so strange to see that the Warren Commission published CE-399, the magic bullet, that clearly shows that Warren was uncommitted to his "truth" about Lee Harvey Oswald. It was neither a mistake nor a "trump card" by Warren, but a frank admission that the evidence must be incomplete until 75 years have passed.

It was indeed a matter of National Security in 1964 to maintain the "Lone Shooter" and the SBT -- and so the FBI had no problem stomping on anybody who challenged Hoover (as well as Warren, LBJ and Dulles) on this point.

Nor did Hoover fully trust Earl Warren to fully control his staff -- proud attorneys who only knew how to seek promote the truth -- so Hoover and the FBI continually leaked "Lone Shooter" evidence to the mass media all throughout 1964.

It was a lie -- and actually Earl Warren honestly admitted that it was a lie. Thanks to President GHW Bush, however, we won't have to wait until 2039 to learn the Truth about Oswald -- instead, we must only wait until 26 October 1963.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

It appears, Paul, that you are trying to give Warren and his staff a free pass, simply because the FBI lied to them about much of the evidence.

What you have yet to grasp, IMO, is that the WC and its staff only wanted the truth from the FBI so they could do a better cover-up.

Take, for example, the single-bullet theory. The WC's staff realized that the FBI and SS versions of the shooting were at odds with the photographic evidence, and would not stand the test of time. So they cooked up the SBT--which they knew to be highly improbable--but also knew would be hard to prove false. They then lied about the back wound location to better sell what they knew would be a difficult sell at best.

[Brad Milch]

Pat's got it right, IMHO. Back in the day, the peons were expected to eat what was handed to them. Salt & pepper was easily available if the taste was bitter.

I've tried to demonstrate to those not alive at the time what young up & commers in jr. & high schools went through when they questioned what appeared to them to be BS in regards to the official explanation of the death of JFK. It WAS BS. It always has been.

The difference between then & now is it can be questioned in public & discussed. Back then what flowed from the top was expected to be consumed, forgotten & everybody get back to the twist party. Keeping one's mouth shut kept Hoover from starting a file & directing his agents at them.

What modern BS sellers overlook is that Hoover was still there after the WC disbanded. Hoover was still there after LBJ left office. Had there been no WC, Hoover's Dec 1963 report was what the public would have gotten as an explanation of the assassination. WCD 298 was a visual courtesy to the WC to get them started on the right track. The right track was what Hoover determined happened. LHO was no stranger to Hoover, he had been keeping tabs on Lee Oswald long before the ambush in Dallas. The answer to would WC staffers go on radio & 'lie their tails off' is yes. Why? Hoover was still there.

BM

Edited April 3, 2015 by Brad Milch

[Paul Trejo]

It appears, Paul, that you are trying to give Warren and his staff a free pass, simply because the FBI lied to them about much of the evidence.

What you have yet to grasp, IMO, is that the WC and its staff only wanted the truth from the FBI so they could do a better cover-up.

Take, for example, the single-bullet theory. The WC's staff realized that the FBI and SS versions of the shooting were at odds with the photographic evidence, and would not stand the test of time. So they cooked up the SBT--which they knew to be highly improbable--but also knew would be hard to prove false. They then lied about the back wound location to better sell what they knew would be a difficult sell at best.

Well, Pat, allow me to clarify. I'm not giving Warren a free pass, as if his Commission was fully honest and only the FBI was the big xxxx.

Yet it remains a fact that the Warren Commission did no investigation of its own, but relied on the FBI for all of its investigation of the facts. What I'm saying is that the Warren Commission and the FBI fully cooperated in the deception about Lee Harvey Oswald.

I think we agree on that point.

Also, the Warren Commission knew that the best lies are the ones mixed with the most truth. So they took thousands of of hours of testimony from hundreds of witnesses.

Yet it was clearly a matter of orientation. The FBI merely followed the orders of J. Edgar Hoover. Their jobs were simple to that extent. The Warren Commission had a different set of orders.

LBJ wanted the safest result as a consequence of the JFK murder. Hoover suggested blaming everything on Lee Harvey Oswald and standing pat on that. LBJ agreed. Earl Warren was pressed to agree. Senator Russell was pressed to agree. Ultimately, all the members of the Warren Commission were pressed to agree. As LBJ on 11/29/1963 told Senator Richard Russell, who tried to stay out of the Warren Commission on the claim that he had no time because of all his local issues:

"...Well, we'll just make the time. There's not going to be any time to begin with. All you're going to do is evaluate a Hoover report he's already made..."

Hoover and LBJ made the first decision -- Oswald was a "Lone Shooter". The Warren Commission was set up to uphold this first decision. All (or most) of the key members of the Warren Commission were informed about this result, just as Senator Russell was informed.

However, the attorneys of the Warren Commission had to be spoon fed this procedure -- since it was very new to them. They were trained to find the truth like bloodhounds. Now they had to deliberately ignore all evidence that would point to more than one shooter at Dealey Plaza. It wasn't easy.

Ball, Liebeler and Jenner finally got the picture in mid-1964. Before 22 July 1964 Liebeler told Sylvia Odio that even if she produced tangible evidence of associates for Oswald, the Commission would have to deny it. So she was warned that after all her efforts and trouble, she was going to be called a "mental case" by the Warren Commission.

Not because she was mistaken -- but precisely because she told the truth, and the truth led directly to accomplices of Lee Harvey Oswald. She had to be stomped on. She was warned.

So, Pat, I'm saying that the Warren Commission was in on the lie from the start. There was indeed a Cover-up, and the Warren Commission leaders took it as their job -- in the interest of National Security. It was to prevent riots in the streets during the Cold War.

This was before any evidence was presented -- there had to be One Lone Shooter. So it would never matter what evidence was presented to them -- they would use a crowbar, so to speak, to force all evidence into the Lone Shooter scenario. When important evidence of accomplices would emerge (e.g. Odio) they would simply stomp on that witness.

Nor did the Warren Commission lie about their lies. Earl Warren admitted to us that the full truth was being withheld, and would only be revealed to the American public in 2039. Now, that was a refreshing bit of honesty.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited April 3, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Brad Milch]

Well said, Paul. I agree with your assessment of the situation 200%.

FWIW, I vividly recall my classmates & me gathered around our 5th grade teacher's desk looking at the photos in her Nov 29, 1963 issue of Life magazine. The issue told us JFK was shot in the head & killed across from the pergola sidewalk steps in a large black & white photo that had an arrow pointing to the spot. WCD 298 visually says the same thing (we didn't know it then; that would come later when the WC Report & all its supporting volumes was released). The magazine told us JFK turned around in his seat & looked back at Oswald shooting at him. We couldn't see that in the photos.

My teacher was ahead of her time. She had a problem with the magazine's narrative of the shooting death of JFK that she shared with us: she had seen John Connally's TV hospital bed interview & noted he said the shooting started just as JFK's parade car turned the corner at Houston & Elm Streets, yet the magazine stated the shooting started as JFK's car was coming back into view from behind the roadway sign further down Elm St. She believed John Connally's version & questioned why JFK's guards didn't do anything to help him. She flipped back to the photo taken from the sniper's nest with the arrow indicating JFK had been shot in the head & killed at that pergola sidewalk location. Our teacher used the photo to show us how much distance was traveled from 'just turned the corner' to the fatal shot (supposedly) at the pergola sidewalk steps. Her assessment: 'Something's fishy; those guards had time to do something'.

Those comments would come up again later in years in news articles, books & online discussions over the years. It started me on my quest to learn who was smelling up the story of JFK's death with lies & why,plus value the perception of women studying the case.

It wasn't until college that I learned about Operation Mockingbird & its mission of intelligence agencies using the media to lie for them. My professor used the 29 Nov 1963 issue of Life magazine to illustrate his point.

Best wishes,

Brad Milch

PS: Pat, the episode of 'Murder She Wrote' about the JFK assassination in your Black Op Radio interview was the season 9, episode 13 show titled 'Dead Eye', originally broadcast in 1993. YouTube may have it in their large Murder She Wrote collection. If it's online & a free download I'll post a link.

I enjoyed the info you provided about Thomas Canning & his disinfo that was injected into the HSCA Report in your appearance on Black Ops Radio. Len Osanic is one sharp cookie & I always enjoy his show & featured guests. I believe what he is currently focused on in exposing fraud in the HSCA Report is important to all interested in the JFK case. So much focus has been on the WC & its failures that it's often forgotten that the WC has a Siamese twin in the HSCA that is equally as bad as the WC, if not worse. Between the two, it's obvious that the public has never gotten an honest investigation of the deaths that occurred in Dallas 51 years ago.

The names of two persons associated with the assassination featured in your guest appearance obviously sets Len Osanic off like a bottle rocket! (LOL). It's great to see EF researchers getting the exposure they deserve on Mr. Osanic's very popular Internet radio show.

Edited April 4, 2015 by Brad Milch