Michael Collins Piper: Final Judgement

[Jon G. Tidd]

So, Steven Gaal,

Do you think Piper was correct? That Mossad was instrumental in killing JFK?

[Thomas Graves]

So, Steven Gaal,

Do you think Piper was correct? That Mossad was instrumental in killing JFK?

What do you think, Mr. Jon G. Tidd?

Hmmmm?

--Tommy

Edited July 4, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Steven Gaal]

So, Steven Gaal,

Do you think Piper was correct? That Mossad was instrumental in killing JFK?

Its very odd that you seem never to have read my posts.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

• CEO OF ASSASSINATION DULLES /// Dulles in contact with Averell Harriman,Bundy,Casey. Has ultra secret personal operatives paid from stolen Japanese gold.
• HELMS COORDINATES/compartmentalizes: ONI,Collins Radio Dallas Security, Hughes Security, Transnationally Protected Narcotics covert operations* (RUBY),Empire Trust.
• JCS via Dulles man Taylor has back up hit team (Trade Mart) and military observes in DP and theater.
• JJA coordinates patsy operation and is overruled in having FRENCH intel patsy.
• ONI acquiesces into CIA using TSBD (see Spiders Web by William Weston)
• Empire Trust becomes involved after JFK touches Federal Reserve.
• JCS/NAVY coordinates unreported pre autopsy covering up right front wound.

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

(There was also a photographic honey traps covert operation associated with the protected narcotics trade) *

Edited July 5, 2015 by Steven Gaal

[Pamela Brown]

I am sorry to hear that Mr. Piper is dead. I was wondering what had happened to him, as he seemed to fall of the radar some years ago. I spoke with him briefly when I ordered my copy of FJ and my impression at the time was that whatever he was putting forth he sincerely believed, whether or not it was the complete truth.

FJ has to me both a fascinating and extremely myopic view of the assassination -- in it, all roads lead to Mossad. MCP does make a fairly good case for JJA being the mastermind of the assassination, operating both as CI chief (keeping tabs on LHO, the patsy, for example) and as the head of the Israeli desk for CIA. I do think that idea has merit.

However, in reading FJ, it can become frustrating to see every chapter return to Mossad. If they had returned to JJA, my thinking might be different. So I find FJ of significant but limited value. The real question to me is 'in what way could Mossad have been involved'?

In terms of Israeli attitude toward JFK, it seems to me he was balanced in his approach, as have been Jimmie Carter and Prez. Obama, seeking equal rights and housing for the Palestinians as well as the Israeli's. JFK did zero in on Dimona early on, and I have no doubt that did not set well with Israel. We discovered, years later, through the statements of Mordechai Vanunu (whom I am still trying to help get released from Israel) that JFK was on the right track in trying to nail down inspections of Dimona. LBJ was gung-ho Israel and lightened up on them considerably.

Underneath Israeli concerns about JFK is, of course, the fact that Joe Sr. was a Hitler appeaser. JFK was known to praise Hitler too, as in his "European Diary", written soon after WWII, he says "within a few years Hitler will emerge from the hatred that surrounds him now as one of the most significant figures who ever lived." (Prelude to Leadership, p 74)). ( I put that passage in my SS100X essay for CCC in 2001 and the editor immediately ordered me to delete it, so I knew then it was dynamite.)

So did Israel/Mossad see JFK as a "Haman" and LBJ as their savior? I don't know, but it might not be out of the question.

Edited July 5, 2015 by Pamela Brown

[Steven Gaal]

I am sorry to hear that Mr. Piper is dead. I was wondering what had happened to him, as he seemed to fall of the radar some years ago. I spoke with him briefly when I ordered my copy of FJ and my impression at the time was that whatever he was putting forth he sincerely believed, whether or not it was the complete truth.

FJ has to me both a fascinating and extremely myopic view of the assassination -- in it, all roads lead to Mossad. MCP does make a fairly good case for JJA being the mastermind of the assassination, operating both as CI chief (keeping tabs on LHO, the patsy, for example) and as the head of the Israeli desk for CIA. I do think that idea has merit.

However, in reading FJ, it can become frustrating to see every chapter return to Mossad. If they had returned to JJA, my thinking might be different. So I find FJ of significant but limited value. The real question to me is 'in what way could Mossad have been involved'?

In terms of Israeli attitude toward JFK, it seems to me he was balanced in his approach, as have been Jimmie Carter and Prez. Obama, seeking equal rights and housing for the Palestinians as well as the Israeli's. JFK did zero in on Dimona early on, and I have no doubt that did not set well with Israel. We discovered, years later, through the statements of Mordechai Vanunu (whom I am still trying to help get released from Israel) that JFK was on the right track in trying to nail down inspections of Dimona. LBJ was gung-ho Israel and lightened up on them considerably.

Underneath Israeli concerns about JFK is, of course, the fact that Joe Sr. was a Hitler appeaser. JFK was known to praise Hitler too, as in his "European Diary", written soon after WWII, he says "within a few years Hitler will emerge from the hatred that surrounds him now as one of the most significant figures who ever lived." (Prelude to Leadership, p 74)). ( I put that passage in my SS100X essay for CCC in 2001 and the editor immediately ordered me to delete it, so I knew then it was dynamite.)

So did Israel/Mossad see JFK as a "Haman" and LBJ as their savior? I don't know, but it might not be out of the question. (Israel Knew LBJ was more on their side, Gaal)

• http://www.tau.ac.il/humanities/abraham/publications/johnson_israel.pdf
• http://www.irmep.org/ila/numec/
• http://www.wisconsinproject.org/countries/israel/nuke.html
• https://books.google.com/books?id=5CVeyhyEJ_4C&pg=PA48&lpg=PA48&dq=lbj+israel+plutonium+1963&source=bl&ots=pC7nFwBOCH&sig=0vsmAm9g6kgNsoCBV5oc_dO2HqM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=tkuZVdnnBMKRsAXt97rwAQ&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAjgK#v=onepage&q=lbj%20israel%20plutonium%201963&f=false see pg 48
• ####################################
• Pamela Brown please see

  RE SECRET SERVICE

• http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21367&p=290648 (POST # 23 , AND Treasury Department // Scribner et al and Dulles) , GAAL

Edited July 5, 2015 by Steven Gaal

[Jon G. Tidd]

Thomas Graves,

I believe MCP made some persuasive arguments, but at the end of the day: [1] I don't believe the CIA qua CIA had anything to do with the assassination; [2] I don't believe JJA had anything to do with the assassination (he seems to me to have become rather unglued by it); and [3] it's hard, not impossible but hard, for me to believe the Mossad as an organization had anything to do with the assassination -- the enduring risks to Israel were foreseeable and were far too great for Mossad as an organization to assume, I believe.

Yet I believe the most significant feature of the assassination today is the continuing cover-up, which tells me something's still at stake. I don't believe what's at stake today is the reputation of LJB, JEH, or some CIA officials in 1963. All those individuals are old and cold.

Israel's most important partner today is America. That wasn't the case on November 21, 1963. For America, Israel is the most important country in the Middle East. That wasn't true on November 21, 1963. Unlike LBJ, JEH, and some long-gone CIA officials, Israel flashes daily on the American radar screen.

Did Israel as a country participate in JFK's murder? I say, no. The risks to Israel would have been far, far too great. So I think MCP didn't get it all right. Did he get it partly right? Many, many opposed JFK. Could some of those opposed have formed a powerful coalition to kill JFK? No doubt. Could persons today feel it is dangerous to reveal who were these individuals? No doubt.

I raise questions, Thomas, because I seek responses of thoughtful individuals here.

[Ron Ecker]

I don't believe the CIA qua CIA had anything to do with the assassination

As I understand it from a previous comment of yours, you don't believe the CIA was involved because it is such an obvious suspect. I forget exactly how you put it, but I don't quite follow the logic, if I understand you correctly. I believe the CIA is such an obvious suspect because at least some "rogue agents," as they are called, were deeply involved. (Who bears responsibility for their actions when you have rogues working in your organization?)

[Jon G. Tidd]

Steven Gaal,

I like your posts but have difficulty reading them.

[Jon G. Tidd]

Ron Ecker,

The reason I don't believe the CIA as an organization was involved in the JFK assassination is that so much information has come out suggesting CIA complicity, I doubt the CIA would allow such information to become public.

Do I believe the CIA is withholding information about the assassination? Absolutely.

Do I believe the withheld information would show CIA complicity in the hit? No. The information would create trails. But IMO, the trails would not lead to the JFK assassination.

[Brian Schmidt]

Jon, how would you expect the CIA to suppress every piece of information suggesting their complicity from becoming public, gun down every researcher or analyst? I don't think that would help their cause very much.

I don't believe the CIA as an institution planned and carried out the assassination per se, but what do you make of very common suspects (David Atlee Phillips or David Sanchez Morales, who is probably the most universally accepted conspirator) being promoted after the assassination to the point where they actually become CIA brass.

Ron, do you think Angleton and/or Helms were involved? I used to be suspicious of them, then I came to believe neither were involved (except with the cover up), but I now think their complicity is quite possible.

[Jon G. Tidd]

Brian Schmidt,

I believe any individual responsible for JFK's murder was dangerous. Dangerous because he or she could have revealed facts leading to the plotters.

The CIA is good at hiding facts. So good it's impossible to believe the CIA would let self-incriminating facts to become public.

[Brian Schmidt]

Jon, the CIA is good at hiding facts, sure. But I think we in the research community tend to mischaracterize the CIA as some all powerful, cloak and dagger, monolithic force that is always able to disguise its hand in everything. This is simply not the case. Go back and read the history of some CIA operations. At times, they are riddled with missteps, security risks, and failures. Their officers aren't magicians, they're human and they make mistakes.

[Ron Ecker]

The CIA is good at hiding facts. So good it's impossible to believe the CIA would let self-incriminating facts to become public.

A CIA agent was caught breaking into a HSCA safe. Why did the CIA let this self-incriminating fact become public?

[Ron Ecker]

Ron, do you think Angleton and/or Helms were involved?

Everything I've read about Angleton only confuses me. What was he doing in Mary Pinchot Meyer's house looking for her diary after her murder? Did he expect to be named in the diary as a JFK assassin, as if Meyer would know? As for Helms, I think he at least must have known who did it (accessory after the fact). He was certainly involved in the cover-up.

[Pamela Brown]

Ron, do you think Angleton and/or Helms were involved?

Everything I've read about Angleton only confuses me. What was he doing in Mary Pinchot Meyer's house looking for her diary after her murder? Did he expect to be named in the diary as a JFK assassin, as if Meyer would know? As for Helms, I think he at least must have known who did it (accessory after the fact). He was certainly involved in the cover-up.

JJA was an expert at CI. Much of what he did was in secret. Some of what he did was deliberately mossed over with confusion and disinfo. It is very difficult to 'see' his hand in anything that happened, unless you know how to look for it. Various odd statements and occurrences have been connected to JJA, and MPM's diary happens to be one of them. Because JJA went to such lengths to get it -- and even got his own hands dirty -- we can be certain he knew or suspected that something he considered sufficiently damaging to him or something he was involved in was in there. This was something he could trust to no one else, or we can be sure he would have used a proxy, such as Howard Hunt, to stage a 'robbery' at her house to retrieve the diary.

If we look at MPM's life, her relationship with JFK, of course, leaps out as a possible motive for the theft of the diary. Did JFK talk about his concerns and suspicions about JJA for example? We can't evaluate what we don't have, but knowing that JJA went to such an extreme to get his hands on the diary speaks volumes imo.

Edited July 6, 2015 by Pamela Brown