LBJ: The Mastermind of JFK's Assassination

[Dawn Meredith]

It is my belief that Lyndon Johnson and CIA Republicans made a dirty deal to murder John Kennedy. With an assist from the mafia and the Operation 40 anti-Castro Cubans. I do think Gen. Edward Lansdale - deep CIA - spotted on site at TSBD - was deeply involved in the JFK assassination. As were a LOT of other folks.

Robert Morrow Austin, TX 512-306-1510 Morrow321@aol.com

Why do you think LBJ was behind the Kennedy assassination? For the life of me I don't understand this thinking.

LBJ made his announcement on national television- March 31, 1968 - that he would not "accept" his party's nomination,nor would he "seek" another term as President. So if his motive was to acquire Kennedy's position as President he sure didnt keep it very long.

Johnson describes that event that made him President as something that "fell upon me".

Some say that his motive in the conspiracy to kill JFK was so he could get into a position to start a war in Vietnam, something JFK refused to do. But if you listen to his conversation with McGeorge Bundy in May 1964 it suggests that LBJ had no interest in expanding the war in Vietnam. In fact his arguments against an expanded war in Asia seems to be the same as his former boss John F. Kennedy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itQdn8Fbs-E&feature=related

If you read Donald Gibson's book "The Kennedy Assassination Cover up" you learn that the creation of the Warren Commission was not LBJ's idea, but instead it was created by wealthy members of the eastern establishment. John F. Kennedy's real enemies. Gibson also focuses on the international aspect of the Kennedy murder conspiracy with a focus on certain British interests.

Lastly it was Lyndon Johnson who made the ominous and cryptic remark to Walter Cronkite while discussing the JFK assassination "we were running a damn Murder Inc. in the Carribean". Just exactly who and what is this Murder Inc.? Permindex? INTERTEL?

I believe LBJ suffered a fatal heart attack right after this interview.

The source of power and wealth for the Kennedy political dynasty resides with some of the nastiest British oligarchical families, like the Cecil's. Joe Kennedy was such a rabid anglophile that he married his daughter off to William John Robert Cavendish, Marquess of Hartington.

QUOTE: Referring to Kathleen Kennedy's marriage to Lord Harrington.

If Lord Hartington succeeds to the title, becomes the 11th Duke of Devon shire, his Duchess will find herself the Mistress of the Royal Robes, first lady In waiting to the Queen. The Queen may well be Princess Elizabeth.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,850493-2,00.html#ixzz0uziRwnAw

It is this kind of power that can successfully assassinate a US President (See Lincoln, Garfield, McKinnley)and cover it up.

This is really getting old. Will the real Terry Mauro please stand up.

Dawm

[Dawn Meredith]

This sounds like a vitally important book. As U.S. Marshal Clint Peoples once told me about LBJ, "It is about time that the truth comes out." I certainly plan to purchase your work.

Ranger Peoples is probably the biggest "hero" in my book, as illustrated in this excerpt:

Clearly, Estes’s checkered past causes anyone to be skeptical about his general credibility; therefore the veracity of his statements regarding Johnson’s involvement is open to debate. Yet one man—a man whose impeccable credentials and highly regarded reputation among Texas law enforcement officials, a man who knew Estes for more than two decades and was responsible for his finally being arraigned—Texas Ranger Captain Clint Peoples, felt that Estes’s unique knowledge of Johnson’s history of criminal conduct was the key to solving the “crime of the century.” Captain Peoples made the judgment that Estes was then a convincing witness who should be listened to; clearly, Peoples considered the man’s character at that point in time and felt that it justified giving him an equal measure, at least, of the “benefit of the doubt” so long extended to Lyndon B. Johnson. After working on his own time for many years to break the Wallace murders open, and tie him directly into the Kennedy assassination as well, as he was about to announce his findings, his car was broadsided by a large truck, immediately killing him. According to Madeleine Brown, who had gotten to know him and had furnished information to him regarding Mac Wallace, “His wrists showed marks (that apparently were caused) from handcuffs.” Captain Peoples knew too much and was still a threat to certain people and institutions as late as 1992. The statements made by Billie Sol Estes, therefore, are vindicated not by the author but by the estimable Ranger Captain Clint Peoples, whose intimate knowledge of the people and events related to this sorry chapter of American history more than offset any sway of doubt about the veracity of Estes.

Thanks for your support (and purchase). I think you won't be disappointed.

I will be getting this book as well. I knew Peoples died shortly after the Marshall "suicide" was changed but I did not realize it was just as he was about to "announce his findings". A real hero for sure.

Dawm

[Phil Nelson]

I previously posted this on JFK Lancer, so if you saw it there, don't bother reading the rest. . .

It is not possible to write a readable book on this subject (and probably any other) citing only 100% veritable facts and statistics. As long as the trips "into the weeds" are based upon reasoned interpretations and not unsubstantiated leaps of logic with no connection to reality, then doing so simply serves to enhance the end product. No matter what examples I decide to use to illustrate how I have "connected the dots" if you have already determined that you prefer to evaluate only the cold and sterile facts and refuse to consider reasonable interpretations of them--no matter how compelling the arguments have been presented--then I would suggest to you that the crime of the century may one day become the crime of the second millennium.

Again, the story is not so much about the previously reported "incidents" of LBJ's selling his influence, his criminal associations, his purported involvement in previous murders (though all of that is certainly there) as it is in connecting them into the story of Johnson's life; this book puts all of that into context with what he was doing, from his childhood through his time as VP and President, even into retirement. In doing so, they become more "real" and understood by the reader, within the context of what was going on at the time.

The following excerpt illustrates this. It is about the time that Johnson ordered his pilots to land his (essentially stolen) airplane at the ranch so that he could fly up to Pecos and forcefully remind Billie Sol Estes to keep his mouth shut. That was the only issue in his mind and he needed the airplane to come to the ranch, he could not be bothered to drive to Austin to meet it, regardless of the pilot's warning that there was inadequate visibility there for them to land the airplane. Until now, this has been treated in a rather ho-hum way by most biographers (who stick to cold, hard statistics and don't connect Event A with Scandal .

______________________________________________

Only a few weeks into the new administration, in early February 1961, it became apparent that the initial meeting between Mac Wallace and Henry Marshall had not been successful—evidently, Marshall was too honest and incapable of accepting either bribes or threats—and the situation continued to spiral out of control. Johnson’s actions at this point can only be described as hysterical. Estes was insisting on another meeting, and Ed Clark pressed Johnson to fly to Pecos to meet with him again to come up with a plan to contain the potential calamity if Marshall was not immediately stopped from his ongoing “persecution” of Billie Sol.

So, on a day in which Johnson was apparently having a particularly serious manic/irritability attack, only one month after the newly minted Kennedy-Johnson administration took office, he would lose any remaining rationality in a screaming fit that he had by telephone to his pilots, who had stayed over in Austin and who had the audacity to attempt to talk Lyndon out of a flight that day—Friday, February 17, 1961—because of “below minimum” weather conditions. In a hysterical blind rage, on a cold, foggy, and overcast evening in south Texas, after hearing Ed Clark tell him he had to meet again with Estes, Johnson called for his airplane to pick him up and expected immediate obedience. He had trained all his other minions to obey his every command—who were these men to think they did not have the same duty to pay proper homage to him, the vice president of the United States? Of all the accounts noted within these pages of Lyndon Johnson’s narcissism, arrogance, and condescension toward the people who worked for him, this incident was clearly the most egregious. His reckless disregard for the safety of the pilots, when their caution impinged on his need to pursue his own criminal conduct, illustrates his abject arrogance better than any words could possibly convey.

Pilot Harold Teague was advised by the Austin airport against making the flight. When Teague complained and tried to refuse to make the flight because of the extremely dangerous weather conditions and the lack of ground control instruments at the landing strip, “Johnson is said to have exploded, venting his profanity upon the pilot, demanding to know ‘what do you think I’m paying you for?’ and again ordering him to ‘get that plane’ to the ranch.” Yet Lyndon B. Johnson would not—could not—let some yokel trying to observe standard minimum visibility aircraft safety rules override him, the vice president of the United States. Johnson had never seen a rule that couldn’t be bent or broken at his whim; we can be sure that he told the pilots something like, “To Hell with those rules, who do you work for, the Austin airport manager or me? Get that God Damn airplane over here now!” This kind of reaction can be surmised, not only from everything we know already about the real Lyndon Johnson, but from the actual results in the official records, as reported through newspaper accounts of the time, describing the tragic aftermath, which are briefly summarized in the following paragraph.

Johnson ordered the pilots into the air to pick him up under threat of losing their jobs. Teague finally agreed and nervously called his wife to tell her they had been ordered to make the flight, before whispering to her that he loved her and asked her to remember that. Minutes later, as “Johnson’s Convair roared into the murky night, flying above the hilly terrain . . . hopelessly groping down for lights they could not see, had at last flown into a cedar-covered hill.” As the pilots searched for the runway through the fog, having no radio beams with which to locate it, they kept flying lower and lower trying to find the runway until finally they flew too low and the plane crashed into a rocky hillside near the boss’s ranch. The two pilots were killed instantly, paying the ultimate cost of disobeying flight rules—not because they decided to do that but because Lyndon B. Johnson insisted on it—as a result of extremely high-risk maneuvers. It was not the first, nor would it be the last, time that men paid with their lives to satisfy the whims of Lyndon B. Johnson; the irony would be that, had he been on board the aircraft, those same flight rules would have remained inviolate. This single incident speaks volumes about the numerous flaws—apparent from his earliest years, based upon his grandmother’s prescient comments noted earlier—in the character of Lyndon B. Johnson.

___________________________________________

The book is filled with proofs of Johnson's reckless disregard for anyone or anything that might impede his rise up the political ladder while simultaneously taking in millions as a result of his collaboration with the likes of Estes and Bobby Baker and many others. How else might one explain how he started out virtually broke and wound up with an estate of at least $20 million? On a congressman's then senator's salary, even before becoming vice president and then president? It certainly wasn't due to Lady Bird's business acumen.

[Greg Burnham]

I agree with you, Terry, about LBJ. Some of the other suppositions, however, I find to be dubious.

It was unfortunate that I was "lumped in" with those who implicated LBJ on the History Channel's TMWKK. When Nigel Turner interviewed and filmed me (over several days), I really didn't suspect that my research would have been represented in that way. Don't misunderstand, however: I have a lot of respect for Nigel and a lot of respect for those researchers who DID implicate LBJ. But, my research did not lead me to the same conclusion--and unfortunately, it was misrepresented. I don't believe it was a deliberate act of misrepresentation. I think it was just due to expediency.

GO_SECURE

monk

Why do you think LBJ was behind the Kennedy assassination? For the life of me I don't understand this thinking.

LBJ made his announcement on national television- March 31, 1968 - that he would not "accept" his party's nomination,nor would he "seek" another term as President. So if his motive was to acquire Kennedy's position as President he sure didnt keep it very long.

Johnson describes that event that made him President as something that "fell upon me".

Some say that his motive in the conspiracy to kill JFK was so he could get into a position to start a war in Vietnam, something JFK refused to do. But if you listen to his conversation with McGeorge Bundy in May 1964 it suggests that LBJ had no interest in expanding the war in Vietnam. In fact his arguments against an expanded war in Asia seems to be the same as his former boss John F. Kennedy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itQdn8Fbs-E&feature=related

If you read Donald Gibson's book "The Kennedy Assassination Cover up" you learn that the creation of the Warren Commission was not LBJ's idea, but instead it was created by wealthy members of the eastern establishment. John F. Kennedy's real enemies. Gibson also focuses on the international aspect of the Kennedy murder conspiracy with a focus on certain British interests.

Lastly it was Lyndon Johnson who made the ominous and cryptic remark to Walter Cronkite while discussing the JFK assassination "we were running a damn Murder Inc. in the Carribean". Just exactly who and what is this Murder Inc.? Permindex? INTERTEL?

I believe LBJ suffered a fatal heart attack right after this interview.

The source of power and wealth for the Kennedy political dynasty resides with some of the nastiest British oligarchical families, like the Cecil's. Joe Kennedy was such a rabid anglophile that he married his daughter off to William John Robert Cavendish, Marquess of Hartington.

QUOTE: Referring to Kathleen Kennedy's marriage to Lord Harrington.

If Lord Hartington succeeds to the title, becomes the 11th Duke of Devon shire, his Duchess will find herself the Mistress of the Royal Robes, first lady In waiting to the Queen. The Queen may well be Princess Elizabeth.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,850493-2,00.html#ixzz0uziRwnAw

It is this kind of power that can successfully assassinate a US President (See Lincoln, Garfield, McKinnley)and cover it up.

Edited August 9, 2010 by Greg Burnham

[Guest Robert Morrow]

It is my belief that Lyndon Johnson and CIA Republicans made a dirty deal to murder John Kennedy. With an assist from the mafia and the Operation 40 anti-Castro Cubans. I do think Gen. Edward Lansdale - deep CIA - spotted on site at TSBD - was deeply involved in the JFK assassination. As were a LOT of other folks.

Robert Morrow Austin, TX 512-306-1510 Morrow321@aol.com

Why do you think LBJ was behind the Kennedy assassination? For the life of me I don't understand this thinking.

LBJ made his announcement on national television- March 31, 1968 - that he would not "accept" his party's nomination,nor would he "seek" another term as President. So if his motive was to acquire Kennedy's position as President he sure didnt keep it very long.

Johnson describes that event that made him President as something that "fell upon me".

Some say that his motive in the conspiracy to kill JFK was so he could get into a position to start a war in Vietnam, something JFK refused to do. But if you listen to his conversation with McGeorge Bundy in May 1964 it suggests that LBJ had no interest in expanding the war in Vietnam. In fact his arguments against an expanded war in Asia seems to be the same as his former boss John F. Kennedy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itQdn8Fbs-E&feature=related

If you read Donald Gibson's book "The Kennedy Assassination Cover up" you learn that the creation of the Warren Commission was not LBJ's idea, but instead it was created by wealthy members of the eastern establishment. John F. Kennedy's real enemies. Gibson also focuses on the international aspect of the Kennedy murder conspiracy with a focus on certain British interests.

Lastly it was Lyndon Johnson who made the ominous and cryptic remark to Walter Cronkite while discussing the JFK assassination "we were running a damn Murder Inc. in the Carribean". Just exactly who and what is this Murder Inc.? Permindex? INTERTEL?

I believe LBJ suffered a fatal heart attack right after this interview.

The source of power and wealth for the Kennedy political dynasty resides with some of the nastiest British oligarchical families, like the Cecil's. Joe Kennedy was such a rabid anglophile that he married his daughter off to William John Robert Cavendish, Marquess of Hartington.

QUOTE: Referring to Kathleen Kennedy's marriage to Lord Harrington.

If Lord Hartington succeeds to the title, becomes the 11th Duke of Devon shire, his Duchess will find herself the Mistress of the Royal Robes, first lady In waiting to the Queen. The Queen may well be Princess Elizabeth.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,850493-2,00.html#ixzz0uziRwnAw

It is this kind of power that can successfully assassinate a US President (See Lincoln, Garfield, McKinnley)and cover it up.

Terry, here is the reason Lyndon Johnson resigned: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gallup_Poll-Approval_Rating-Lyndon_B_Johnson.png

#1 His approval rating had dropped under 40%, which for an incumbent politician means you are going down the tube. Johnson's pride could not take it and he would not even have won the Democratic primary against Robert Kennedy, his hated enemy. After Johnson murdered JFK, Johnson had high approval ratings due to the "rally around the leader" effect. After 3 years of the Vietnam War, and inflation kicking up, LBJ's approval rating sunk like a rock in water.

#2 Lyndon Johnson wanted to create a Texas Court of Inquiry so he could easily control the cover up. Instead he was forced to create a Warren Commission, which really should be called the Allen Dulles CIA commission because Dulles, McCoy, and Gerald Ford, the FBI's man, really ran and controlled that thing NOT Earl Warren or the others. Lyndon Johnson, J. Edgar Hoover and Allen Dulles of CIA fame were the 3 key players who maniputated the Warren Commission cover up. After that the controlled MSM (no alternative media then) and Operation Mockingbird took over.

#3 Excellent point about the Eastern Establishment who hated John Kennedy. Lyndon Johnson was in an ALLIANCE with the CIA Eastern Establishment Republicans like Allen Dulles, Nelson Rockefeller and George Herbert Walker Bush, all of whom despised John Kennedy for many reasons ranging from foreign policy to Kennedy's threat to the oil industry's favored tax status. Remember, those Rockefellers made a LOT of money off oil and they were foreign policy hawks, too, Nelson Rockefeller telling JFK to use tactical nukes in Vietnam (!).

Speaking of the hated Eastern Establishment, as well as deep CIA, who do you think Lyndon Johnson wanted to be PRESIDENT after he stepped down? NELSON ROCKEFELLER!!!, the pinnacle player of the Eastern Establishment. After LBJ told the nation he was not running, he had Rocky and his wife to the White House and URGED Rockefeller to run and promised he would never campaign against the Republican. Little known fact: Lyndon Johnson was IN BED with the "Eastern Establishment" and he was a tool of the Rockefellers... and LBJ was especially in bed with CIA Republicans.

In my opinion, it is NOT a question of whether the "Eastern Establishment" using Ed Lansdale and Operation 40 assassins killed Kennedy or Lyndon Johnson killed Kennedy. The answer is they were in ALLIANCE and the BOTH murdered John Kennedy (and covered it up together, too.)

Edited August 11, 2010 by Robert Morrow

[Phil Nelson]

Date Chapter, Page Description

8/12/2010 6 390-391

I have just determined that a reference to a purported CIA memo from DCI John McCone to James J. Rowley refers to a document that is not genuine. This is an error that slipped through the final editing process, an item which I had intended to verify but neglected to do so; I had misgivings about its authenticity and intended to do a check on it before publishing the book. Larry Hancock, who has been so helpful to me in many other instances, offered the following comments regarding the investigation into the memo’s origin:

“Phil, that document is totally bogus, several of us have spent considerable money and time establishing that, working directly at the archives in DC. Perhaps the most interesting thing about it though is that whoever did it was very astute, the number sequence and file designations are right on the money and somebody took great effort to plant this thing in the middle of a legitimate agency document series - that really had us going at first.

But then it also contains a couple of big errors that anyone with that degree of knowledge should not make. All in all it looks like a real professional job of disinformation,impossible to track its origin but I'm guessing during the HSCA period. I've often speculated that it might have been modeled on a real document, specifically intended to muddy the trail on something that might have existed at one time. On the other hand I really don't see the CIA sharing anything about their relationship with Oswald under any circumstances . . . what fooled us in the beginning is that if you search the number series of the document, its real. Beyond that it’s topically consistent with such a memo. So we put somebody on an airplane and he rushes to DC and out to NARA but lo and behold, no such document. So somebody manufactured the thing from scratch and leaked it into the research community on purpose.”

The thing that causes the biggest pain is that inclusion of this document wasn’t really necessary to make the point that it was merely intended to reinforce: Oswald had extensive associations with the ONI, the CIA and the FBI, as demonstrated on the previous four and one half pages (pp. 386-390).

Mea Culpa!

July 30, 2010 Preface 14

Index 713

First, James DiEugenio’s name was inadvertently omitted in the list of some of the most significant books on the subject on page 14. Given the number of references to his books and blogs, this was obviously an oversight.

Neither was it included in the Index. Both of these oversights are very embarrassing, given the number of people who are indebted to him for his previous works.

Mea Culpa!

[Guest Robert Morrow]

Date Chapter, Page Description

8/12/2010 6 390-391

I have just determined that a reference to a purported CIA memo from DCI John McCone to James J. Rowley refers to a document that is not genuine. This is an error that slipped through the final editing process, an item which I had intended to verify but neglected to do so; I had misgivings about its authenticity and intended to do a check on it before publishing the book. Larry Hancock, who has been so helpful to me in many other instances, offered the following comments regarding the investigation into the memo’s origin:

“Phil, that document is totally bogus, several of us have spent considerable money and time establishing that, working directly at the archives in DC. Perhaps the most interesting thing about it though is that whoever did it was very astute, the number sequence and file designations are right on the money and somebody took great effort to plant this thing in the middle of a legitimate agency document series - that really had us going at first.

But then it also contains a couple of big errors that anyone with that degree of knowledge should not make. All in all it looks like a real professional job of disinformation,impossible to track its origin but I'm guessing during the HSCA period. I've often speculated that it might have been modeled on a real document, specifically intended to muddy the trail on something that might have existed at one time. On the other hand I really don't see the CIA sharing anything about their relationship with Oswald under any circumstances . . . what fooled us in the beginning is that if you search the number series of the document, its real. Beyond that it’s topically consistent with such a memo. So we put somebody on an airplane and he rushes to DC and out to NARA but lo and behold, no such document. So somebody manufactured the thing from scratch and leaked it into the research community on purpose.”

The thing that causes the biggest pain is that inclusion of this document wasn’t really necessary to make the point that it was merely intended to reinforce: Oswald had extensive associations with the ONI, the CIA and the FBI, as demonstrated on the previous four and one half pages (pp. 386-390).

Mea Culpa!

July 30, 2010 Preface 14

Index 713

First, James DiEugenio’s name was inadvertently omitted in the list of some of the most significant books on the subject on page 14. Given the number of references to his books and blogs, this was obviously an oversight.

Neither was it included in the Index. Both of these oversights are very embarrassing, given the number of people who are indebted to him for his previous works.

Mea Culpa!

That is exactly what that document is A PROFESSIONAL CASE OF DISINFORMATION. You know you are getting close on the trail when stuff like that starts appearing. Meaning the CONTENT of the memo is probably basically true, but the disinfo artist from intelligence wants the memo itself to be discredited as a FORGERY, and thus reverberate back into ATTEMPTING to discredit the content of this document.

I think it is pretty obvious at this point Oswald was a "fake defector" to Russia and he could easily have been ONI or CIA ... or both ... these guys flip around from agency to agency sometimes.

Sorry you fell for the bait, but a carefully crafted hoax like this actually firms up the case that Oswald was an undercover agent of US intelligence.

[William Kelly]

Date Chapter, Page Description

8/12/2010 6 390-391

I have just determined that a reference to a purported CIA memo from DCI John McCone to James J. Rowley refers to a document that is not genuine. This is an error that slipped through the final editing process, an item which I had intended to verify but neglected to do so; I had misgivings about its authenticity and intended to do a check on it before publishing the book. Larry Hancock, who has been so helpful to me in many other instances, offered the following comments regarding the investigation into the memo's origin:

"Phil, that document is totally bogus, several of us have spent considerable money and time establishing that, working directly at the archives in DC. Perhaps the most interesting thing about it though is that whoever did it was very astute, the number sequence and file designations are right on the money and somebody took great effort to plant this thing in the middle of a legitimate agency document series - that really had us going at first.

But then it also contains a couple of big errors that anyone with that degree of knowledge should not make. All in all it looks like a real professional job of disinformation,impossible to track its origin but I'm guessing during the HSCA period. I've often speculated that it might have been modeled on a real document, specifically intended to muddy the trail on something that might have existed at one time. On the other hand I really don't see the CIA sharing anything about their relationship with Oswald under any circumstances . . . what fooled us in the beginning is that if you search the number series of the document, its real. Beyond that it's topically consistent with such a memo. So we put somebody on an airplane and he rushes to DC and out to NARA but lo and behold, no such document. So somebody manufactured the thing from scratch and leaked it into the research community on purpose."

The thing that causes the biggest pain is that inclusion of this document wasn't really necessary to make the point that it was merely intended to reinforce: Oswald had extensive associations with the ONI, the CIA and the FBI, as demonstrated on the previous four and one half pages (pp. 386-390).

Mea Culpa!

July 30, 2010 Preface 14

Index 713

First, James DiEugenio's name was inadvertently omitted in the list of some of the most significant books on the subject on page 14. Given the number of references to his books and blogs, this was obviously an oversight.

Neither was it included in the Index. Both of these oversights are very embarrassing, given the number of people who are indebted to him for his previous works.

Mea Culpa!

That is exactly what that document is A PROFESSIONAL CASE OF DISINFORMATION. You know you are getting close on the trail when stuff like that starts appearing. Meaning the CONTENT of the memo is probably basically true, but the disinfo artist from intelligence wants the memo itself to be discredited as a FORGERY, and thus reverberate back into ATTEMPTING to discredit the content of this document.

I think it is pretty obvious at this point Oswald was a "fake defector" to Russia and he could easily have been ONI or CIA ... or both ... these guys flip around from agency to agency sometimes.

Sorry you fell for the bait, but a carefully crafted hoax like this actually firms up the case that Oswald was an undercover agent of US intelligence.

That document is certainly a case of professional disinformation - just like the Bledsoe document and the Spirgilio document.

Gilbride also makes the same mistake in assuming they are for real.

While I almost always agree with Larry Hancock, one of the most astute reasearchs around, I must disagree with him in that it's impossible to track its origin. I think its origins are know - that it was among the so called "Crowley Records" that were fed to Gregory Douglas and first published in his book and refered to as the "Zipper Documents."

If there is another source, predating that one, I'd like to hear about it.

BK

[Phil Nelson]

That document is certainly a case of professional disinformation - just like the Bledsoe document and the Spirgilio document.

Gilbride also makes the same mistake in assuming they are for real.

While I almost always agree with Larry Hancock, one of the most astute reasearchs around, I must disagree with him in that it's impossible to track its origin. I think its origins are know - that it was among the so called "Crowley Records" that were fed to Gregory Douglas and first published in his book and refered to as the "Zipper Documents."

If there is another source, predating that one, I'd like to hear about it.

BK

I've taken the liberty of communicating this point to Larry; the following was his response, posted on JFK Lancer:

Actually I don't frequent the Ed forum, mostly because I kept

having computer problems after spending time there and at the

moment can't risk that.

My question would be - has someone actually identified that

document among the "Zipper documents"? As I recall most

of those documents were very specifically planning memos

relating to a highly structured and "official" inter agency

large scale conspiracy (one in which a formal paper record

was kept of a project to kill the President...duh, like that

was going to happen). From that perspective this document

seems inconsistent with the Zipper theme but I have to admit

that the premise was so bogus (I recall discussing it with Peter

Dale Scott a month or so after it came into view) that I never

read the book or did more than scan a small sampling of the purported documents.

Another point would be the timing, the Zipper documents showed

up within the last decade or so if I recall...and I thought

this document had been around longer...somebody could certainly

check that out though.

So...if someone has some evidence that it was one of the

forged "Crowley documents" and if the timing matches I'd surely

like to know it so I can take this off my mystery items list.

I would say that it certainly would not be the first "good forgery"

used to make money supporting a book...

-- Larry

[Mark Knight]

It is my belief that Lyndon Johnson and CIA Republicans made a dirty deal to murder John Kennedy. With an assist from the mafia and the Operation 40 anti-Castro Cubans. I do think Gen. Edward Lansdale - deep CIA - spotted on site at TSBD - was deeply involved in the JFK assassination. As were a LOT of other folks.

Robert Morrow Austin, TX 512-306-1510 Morrow321@aol.com

Why do you think LBJ was behind the Kennedy assassination? For the life of me I don't understand this thinking.

LBJ made his announcement on national television- March 31, 1968 - that he would not "accept" his party's nomination,nor would he "seek" another term as President. So if his motive was to acquire Kennedy's position as President he sure didnt keep it very long.

Johnson describes that event that made him President as something that "fell upon me".

Some say that his motive in the conspiracy to kill JFK was so he could get into a position to start a war in Vietnam, something JFK refused to do. But if you listen to his conversation with McGeorge Bundy in May 1964 it suggests that LBJ had no interest in expanding the war in Vietnam. In fact his arguments against an expanded war in Asia seems to be the same as his former boss John F. Kennedy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itQdn8Fbs-E&feature=related

If you read Donald Gibson's book "The Kennedy Assassination Cover up" you learn that the creation of the Warren Commission was not LBJ's idea, but instead it was created by wealthy members of the eastern establishment. John F. Kennedy's real enemies. Gibson also focuses on the international aspect of the Kennedy murder conspiracy with a focus on certain British interests.

Lastly it was Lyndon Johnson who made the ominous and cryptic remark to Walter Cronkite while discussing the JFK assassination "we were running a damn Murder Inc. in the Carribean". Just exactly who and what is this Murder Inc.? Permindex? INTERTEL?

I believe LBJ suffered a fatal heart attack right after this interview.

The source of power and wealth for the Kennedy political dynasty resides with some of the nastiest British oligarchical families, like the Cecil's. Joe Kennedy was such a rabid anglophile that he married his daughter off to William John Robert Cavendish, Marquess of Hartington.

QUOTE: Referring to Kathleen Kennedy's marriage to Lord Harrington.

If Lord Hartington succeeds to the title, becomes the 11th Duke of Devon shire, his Duchess will find herself the Mistress of the Royal Robes, first lady In waiting to the Queen. The Queen may well be Princess Elizabeth.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,850493-2,00.html#ixzz0uziRwnAw

It is this kind of power that can successfully assassinate a US President (See Lincoln, Garfield, McKinnley)and cover it up.

Terry, here is the reason Lyndon Johnson resigned: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gallup_Poll-Approval_Rating-Lyndon_B_Johnson.png

#1 His approval rating had dropped under 40%, which for an incumbent politician means you are going down the tube. Johnson's pride could not take it and he would not even have won the Democratic primary against Robert Kennedy, his hated enemy. After Johnson murdered JFK, Johnson had high approval ratings due to the "rally around the leader" effect. After 3 years of the Vietnam War, and inflation kicking up, LBJ's approval rating sunk like a rock in water.

#2 Lyndon Johnson wanted to create a Texas Court of Inquiry so he could easily control the cover up. Instead he was forced to create a Warren Commission, which really should be called the Allen Dulles CIA commission because Dulles, McCoy, and Gerald Ford, the FBI's man, really ran and controlled that thing NOT Earl Warren or the others. Lyndon Johnson, J. Edgar Hoover and Allen Dulles of CIA fame were the 3 key players who maniputated the Warren Commission cover up. After that the controlled MSM (no alternative media then) and Operation Mockingbird took over.

#3 Excellent point about the Eastern Establishment who hated John Kennedy. Lyndon Johnson was in an ALLIANCE with the CIA Eastern Establishment Republicans like Allen Dulles, Nelson Rockefeller and George Herbert Walker Bush, all of whom despised John Kennedy for many reasons ranging from foreign policy to Kennedy's threat to the oil industry's favored tax status. Remember, those Rockefellers made a LOT of money off oil and they were foreign policy hawks, too, Nelson Rockefeller telling JFK to use tactical nukes in Vietnam (!).

Speaking of the hated Eastern Establishment, as well as deep CIA, who do you think Lyndon Johnson wanted to be PRESIDENT after he stepped down? NELSON ROCKEFELLER!!!, the pinnacle player of the Eastern Establishment. After LBJ told the nation he was not running, he had Rocky and his wife to the White House and URGED Rockefeller to run and promised he would never campaign against the Republican. Little known fact: Lyndon Johnson was IN BED with the "Eastern Establishment" and he was a tool of the Rockefellers... and LBJ was especially in bed with CIA Republicans.

In my opinion, it is NOT a question of whether the "Eastern Establishment" using Ed Lansdale and Operation 40 assassins killed Kennedy or Lyndon Johnson killed Kennedy. The answer is they were in ALLIANCE and the BOTH murdered John Kennedy (and covered it up together, too.)

Rob,

LBJ never resigned; he simply announced that he would not run for, nor accept, his party's nomination for the presidency. NIXON is the ONLY president who has ever resigned, to date.

On March 31, 1968, the world was not exactly as you have described it. Bobby Kennedy had only announced his presidential campaign 15 days before. It was antiwar candidate Eugene McCarthy, NOT Bobby Kennedy, who was pummelling LBJ's stand-in candidates in the early Democratic primaries. And besides the war in Viet Nam turning badly as a result of North Viet Nam's Tet offensive [we wrote "Viet Nam" as two words back then], just six weeks prior, the USS Pueblo, and American spy vessel, was captured by North Korea. Although Defense Department spokesmen claimed the Pueblo wasn't a spy ship, photos provided by North Korea proved the story was a lie. So on March 31, 1968, American prestige was in tatters. At home, there had been several "long hot summers" of racial unrest/riots from New Jersey to California, all under LBJ's watch. For LBJ to announce his decision to not seek a new term was unexpected, but it was probably inevitable. It wasn't a resignation from office, but a sign of his resignation to the fact that he was powerless to control events domestically OR abroad.

I'm old...I was there in '68, and I still have my "Kennedy for President" button with Bobby's picture from that campaign. Bobby Kennedy's nomination was anything but a certainty up to his assassination; but he was closing in on "Clean Gene," and if there had been a battle of multiple ballots to determine the Democratic nomination, Bobby had an outside chance of prevailing. But it was ONLY an outside chance, even after the California primary.

Not trying to start anything; just trying to keep this thread factually correct.

Edited August 13, 2010 by Mark Knight

[Bill Grote]

It is my belief that Lyndon Johnson and CIA Republicans made a dirty deal to murder John Kennedy. With an assist from the mafia and the Operation 40 anti-Castro Cubans. I do think Gen. Edward Lansdale - deep CIA - spotted on site at TSBD - was deeply involved in the JFK assassination. As were a LOT of other folks.

Robert Morrow Austin, TX 512-306-1510 Morrow321@aol.com

Why do you think LBJ was behind the Kennedy assassination? For the life of me I don't understand this thinking.

LBJ made his announcement on national television- March 31, 1968 - that he would not "accept" his party's nomination,nor would he "seek" another term as President. So if his motive was to acquire Kennedy's position as President he sure didnt keep it very long.

Johnson describes that event that made him President as something that "fell upon me".

Some say that his motive in the conspiracy to kill JFK was so he could get into a position to start a war in Vietnam, something JFK refused to do. But if you listen to his conversation with McGeorge Bundy in May 1964 it suggests that LBJ had no interest in expanding the war in Vietnam. In fact his arguments against an expanded war in Asia seems to be the same as his former boss John F. Kennedy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itQdn8Fbs-E&feature=related

If you read Donald Gibson's book "The Kennedy Assassination Cover up" you learn that the creation of the Warren Commission was not LBJ's idea, but instead it was created by wealthy members of the eastern establishment. John F. Kennedy's real enemies. Gibson also focuses on the international aspect of the Kennedy murder conspiracy with a focus on certain British interests.

Lastly it was Lyndon Johnson who made the ominous and cryptic remark to Walter Cronkite while discussing the JFK assassination "we were running a damn Murder Inc. in the Carribean". Just exactly who and what is this Murder Inc.? Permindex? INTERTEL?

I believe LBJ suffered a fatal heart attack right after this interview.

The source of power and wealth for the Kennedy political dynasty resides with some of the nastiest British oligarchical families, like the Cecil's. Joe Kennedy was such a rabid anglophile that he married his daughter off to William John Robert Cavendish, Marquess of Hartington.

QUOTE: Referring to Kathleen Kennedy's marriage to Lord Harrington.

If Lord Hartington succeeds to the title, becomes the 11th Duke of Devon shire, his Duchess will find herself the Mistress of the Royal Robes, first lady In waiting to the Queen. The Queen may well be Princess Elizabeth.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,850493-2,00.html#ixzz0uziRwnAw

It is this kind of power that can successfully assassinate a US President (See Lincoln, Garfield, McKinnley)and cover it up.

Terry, here is the reason Lyndon Johnson resigned: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gallup_Poll-Approval_Rating-Lyndon_B_Johnson.png

#1 His approval rating had dropped under 40%, which for an incumbent politician means you are going down the tube. Johnson's pride could not take it and he would not even have won the Democratic primary against Robert Kennedy, his hated enemy. After Johnson murdered JFK, Johnson had high approval ratings due to the "rally around the leader" effect. After 3 years of the Vietnam War, and inflation kicking up, LBJ's approval rating sunk like a rock in water.

#2 Lyndon Johnson wanted to create a Texas Court of Inquiry so he could easily control the cover up. Instead he was forced to create a Warren Commission, which really should be called the Allen Dulles CIA commission because Dulles, McCoy, and Gerald Ford, the FBI's man, really ran and controlled that thing NOT Earl Warren or the others. Lyndon Johnson, J. Edgar Hoover and Allen Dulles of CIA fame were the 3 key players who maniputated the Warren Commission cover up. After that the controlled MSM (no alternative media then) and Operation Mockingbird took over.

#3 Excellent point about the Eastern Establishment who hated John Kennedy. Lyndon Johnson was in an ALLIANCE with the CIA Eastern Establishment Republicans like Allen Dulles, Nelson Rockefeller and George Herbert Walker Bush, all of whom despised John Kennedy for many reasons ranging from foreign policy to Kennedy's threat to the oil industry's favored tax status. Remember, those Rockefellers made a LOT of money off oil and they were foreign policy hawks, too, Nelson Rockefeller telling JFK to use tactical nukes in Vietnam (!).

Speaking of the hated Eastern Establishment, as well as deep CIA, who do you think Lyndon Johnson wanted to be PRESIDENT after he stepped down? NELSON ROCKEFELLER!!!, the pinnacle player of the Eastern Establishment. After LBJ told the nation he was not running, he had Rocky and his wife to the White House and URGED Rockefeller to run and promised he would never campaign against the Republican. Little known fact: Lyndon Johnson was IN BED with the "Eastern Establishment" and he was a tool of the Rockefellers... and LBJ was especially in bed with CIA Republicans.

In my opinion, it is NOT a question of whether the "Eastern Establishment" using Ed Lansdale and Operation 40 assassins killed Kennedy or Lyndon Johnson killed Kennedy. The answer is they were in ALLIANCE and the BOTH murdered John Kennedy (and covered it up together, too.)

Rob,

LBJ never resigned; he simply announced that he would not run for, nor accept, his party's nomination for the presidency. NIXON is the ONLY president who has ever resigned, to date.

On March 31, 1968, the world was not exactly as you have described it. Bobby Kennedy had only announced his presidential campaign 15 days before. It was antiwar candidate Eugene McCarthy, NOT Bobby Kennedy, who was pummelling LBJ's stand-in candidates in the early Democratic primaries. And besides the war in Viet Nam turning badly as a result of North Viet Nam's Tet offensive [we wrote "Viet Nam" as two words back then], just six weeks prior, the USS Pueblo, and American spy vessel, was captured by North Korea. Although Defense Department spokesmen claimed the Pueblo wasn't a spy ship, photos provided by North Korea proved the story was a lie. So on March 31, 1968, American prestige was in tatters. At home, there had been several "long hot summers" of racial unrest/riots from New Jersey to California, all under LBJ's watch. For LBJ to announce his decision to not seek a new term was unexpected, but it was probably inevitable. It wasn't a resignation from office, but a sign of his resignation to the fact that he was powerless to control events domestically OR abroad.

I'm old...I was there in '68, and I still have my "Kennedy for President" button with Bobby's picture from that campaign. Bobby Kennedy's nomination was anything but a certainty up to his assassination; but he was closing in on "Clean Gene," and if there had been a battle of multiple ballots to determine the Democratic nomination, Bobby had an outside chance of prevailing. But it was ONLY an outside chance, even after the California primary.

Not trying to start anything; just trying to keep this thread factually correct.

I'm old too (sob)and was dismayed by the war and was trying hard to avoid the draft at the time. Is it also possible that Johnson was forced out by someone who had the proof of his mis-deeds and decided to expose them if he (Johnson) didn't drop out? This someone would probably have mob ties (Rebozo) and be very trickey, and, of course, not a crook. I mean from reading this book on LBJ, practically anything was possible at the time. Maybe it still works like that (nah).

[Guest Robert Morrow]

Agreed. Lyndon Johnson did not resign. He simply chose not to run for re-election. And that was because he was an extremely unpopular guy for many reasons. Of course, LBJ was hoping to be begged to be nominated at the 1968 Demo convention, just so he could turn it down. Which just shows you what a whacked out guy Lyndon Johnson was. But of course, with you being an RFK guy, you knew it at the time.

Robert Kennedy's entry into the Presidential race in 1968 was electric. And after winning California, RFK had major momentum on his side and probably would have won at the 1968 Demo convention. There were lots of unpledged delegates back then and many were poised to go with RFK.

And Johnson was very, very concerned about the prospects of a RFK presidency, especially in relation to the JFK assassination. That is why LBJ was so ardent for NELSON ROCKEFELLER, a deep CIA guy who he knew would keep the cover up going... Just look at the "Rockefeller Commission" a few years later.

Edited August 14, 2010 by Robert Morrow

[Phil Nelson]

Agreed. Lyndon Johnson did not resign. He simply chose not to run for re-election. And that was because he was an extremely unpopular guy for many reasons. Of course, LBJ was hoping to be begged to be nominated at the 1968 Demo convention, just so he could turn it down. Which just shows you what a whacked out guy Lyndon Johnson was. But of course, with you being an RFK guy, you knew it at the time.

Robert Kennedy's entry into the Presidential race in 1968 was electric. And after winning California, RFK had major momentum on his side and probably would have won at the 1968 Demo convention. There were lots of unpledged delegates back then and many were poised to go with RFK.

And Johnson was very, very concerned about the prospects of a RFK presidency, especially in relation to the JFK assassination. That is why LBJ was so ardent for NELSON ROCKEFELLER, a deep CIA guy who he knew would keep the cover up going... Just look at the "Rockefeller Commission" a few years later.

I was there too. . . one of the "McCarthy Kids" marching around Wisconsin, just before that very important primary event. As I recall, Johnson bowed out after his stand-in candidate (?) lost in the New Hampshire primary. Anyway, Humphrey didn't quite manage to lose Johnson's attachment to Viet Nam (oh, how I remember that spelling) and after the calamity of the Democratic National Convention in Chicago and all the demonstrations going on practically everywhere, there was no way that Humphrey could have beat Nixon. The truth about Vietnam and what we were doing there had begun emerging from the deceit created by, or on his behalf, Lyndon B. Johnson. (I've devoted much of Chapter 2 to the Vietnam build-up period 1961-63, up to the point of JFK's assassination. And the rest, lamentably, is all in the Epilogue, along with other revelations about the 36th president.

Another primary (perhaps "the" primary) reason Johnson decided not to run was because he was having severe mental breakdowns throughout his presidency and these, combined with his natural paranoic state, rendered him unable to deal with even the prospect of losing. He suffered recurrent episodes so severe that he was locked away in a room forbidden by all but his cloest aides and wife. In fact, all during his political climb, whenever he ran for a new elective office (congress and senate)he worked himself into a frenzy and became physically ill. It also explains why he didn't even try to run a campaign for the presidency in 1960, until he announced his candidacy five days before the convention. That was clearly "too little, too late" and the foremost political genius of his day knew that all along: his psyche could not stand a loss, because it would mean he would never have another chance to gain the office he considered his birthright. He had to get into the Oval Office by the "back door," and I believe I have written the complete story of how he did it, all laid out in the first five chapters of my ten chapter book.

Edited August 14, 2010 by Phil Nelson

[Phil Nelson]

Two issues have recently surfaced regarding my erroneous interpretations of material referenced in the book:

First, I must acknowledge an error which I had been warned about by Larry Hancock during his review of a copy of the manuscript several months ago. The misunderstanding was completely my own and was due to my assumption of the veracity of Robert D. Morrow’s account of reading a document which he alleged Johnson had hand-written to Gen. Charles Cabell shortly after the Bay of Pigs incident, warning of Kennedy’s pending plan to break-up the CIA (at p. 125). Larry had flagged the issue of Morrow’s general credibility at that time, and I did delete other material from the book which I thought he had embellished (or simply made up), such as the purported flight with David Ferrie into, and then from, Cuba in the middle of the Bay of Pigs invasion.

I clearly deluded myself with the notion that his prevarications related only to the numerous instances of his self-aggrandizing stories, not the more general material such as LBJ’s alleged letter.

Evidently, the publisher and author took certain liberties with categorizing the book as “non-fiction.”

.....................

Larry furnished the following comments which explain a little of Morrow’s background:

"The basic scoop on Morrow is that he heard some rumors that convinced him there was a conspiracy - the rumors involved both an associate of Bobby Baker (Mickey Weiner) and a couple of intelligence officers (INTEL 1 and INTEL 2), one of whom was a personal military aide to Lyndon Johnson in 1963 (Howard Burris). Morrow decided to press his conspiracy views during the Church committee hearings, approaching at least one congressman and persuading him that there should be an investigation. It is fair to say that Morrow’s effort did help stimulate some early interest in what became the HSCA. The problem was that, at the time, Morrow had no direct information or evidence about a conspiracy and while he had certainly worked for Kohley on a Cuban counterfeiting scheme, there was no evidence that it was a CIA sponsored project (Details of that are available in the testimony offered in the counterfeiting trial).

"It appears that Morrow, possibly in frustration, decided to start writing books to focus attention on a conspiracy, and the more books he wrote the wilder his stories got. He admitted privately that he was making things up to gain attention since that would help bring pressure for an investigation. At the core of things he believed there was a conspiracy but since he could not crack it, anything was fair game. There are a couple of true and important things in his books: Weiner and his Baker connections, Intell 1 (Burris), both are key pieces of gossip. But beyond that, there is simply no evidence to support any contact between Morrow and high level CIA officers or his involvement in CIA Cuban operations."

.............

As was the case with the other “disinformation” I fell for (regarding the McCone-Rowley memorandum noted previously) the reference was redundant to other material making the same point. Both were clearly attempts to reach a bit too far to reinforce points already made; in this case, that Lyndon Johnson had created his own “back channel” network to both the military and intelligence communities, in addition to the FBI, at the highest levels.

Unfortunately, the error was repeated on pages 177-178. In the context of the narrative on those pages, some of the same information was corroborated by Evelyn Lincoln, Kenneth O”Donnell and Horace Busby (p. 89), though not the issue of Johnson’s Secret Service mole within the White House. That is open to debate since there is no other credible reference to support such an assertion.

Mea Culpa.

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

I have also been told by Douglas Caddy, the attorney for Billie Sol Estes in 1984, that this sentence (p. 296) is incorrect: “The Department of Justice responded with a letter which took on a very adversarial tone, essentially threatening to take aggressive action toward Mr. Estes if he didn’t drop the case for good.” I should have inserted the qualifier “in my opinion” because it was the way I might have read that letter if I were in the position of possibly putting myself in legal jeopardy for any errors or mistakes I might make versus the alternative of walking away and just keeping my mouth shut. Mr. Caddy advised me of the following:

“Edward Miller, a former top official with the FBI, at my request arranged for me, along with Miller, to visit with Stephen Trott about Billie Sol Estes' desire to tell what he knew. Trott could not have been more cooperative in laying the legal groundwork for Estes' to make full disclosure. Trott's letter was a standard U.S. Department of Justice communication used under such circumstances. Miller and I met twice with Trott. On the latter occasion he arranged for three FBI agents, who had been assigned to read the FBI files on Estes and on the Kennedy assassination, to fly the next day to Abilene to interview Estes. At that meeting, attended by Estes, his daughter, Pam, and myself, Estes suddenly declared he would not talk -- period. The FBI agents, who had remained in their hotel rooms awaiting a call from me to join the meeting with Estes, then flew back to Washington the same day.

"I put many months of work into this matter at Estes' request in preparation of his obtaining a grant from the Moody Foundation whose trustee, Shearn Moody, had agreed to fund after Estes' approached him while Estes was still in prison. The proposed historical grant was for Estes' to tell what he knew. At that time I was administering several grants from the Moody Foundation in which Shearn Moody was specifically interested. When Estes' backed down at the Abilene meeting, the prospect of a grant from the Moody Foundation ended.

"Why Estes' backed out has remained a mystery. U.S. Marshal Clint Peoples told me afterwards that he thought Estes' backed out because one of his family members might have ended up being implicated in the dealings with LBJ had the disclosure project proceeded."

Regardless of his mysterious reasons for “clamming up” at that late juncture, he did shut up for over two decades. At that time, he lent his support to the work of a French investigative reporter, William Reymond, who eventually produced both a book and a video presenting the Johnson/Carter/Wallace conspiracy story in considerable detail, with corroboration from individuals (including Kyle Brown, a former associate of both Carter and Estes) who had heard Carter describing the conspiracy on tape as well as in person. Unfortunately, this long awaited confirmation was undermined by the later release of a book under Estes’ own name which presented a much larger conspiracy scenario and recanted on some points which he had related to Caddy, the Justice Department and Reymond. As Larry Hancock noted to me, the Estes book and the material in it left many researchers, who had been deeply involved investigating the Johnson/Carter/Wallace conspiracy very much “up in the air”. Despite contacts with Estes himself, no resolution was ever obtained with the issues created by the appearance of his book.

The reason for Estes’s sudden recantation of his 1984 testimony—and the story he authorized in Reymond’s book and video—is open for speculation, but threats from someone against himself (then 82 years old) or one of his family members is but one possibility.

The bottom line, with respect to the sentence I referenced above, should have at the very least carried a qualifier, or better yet, a statement that to a trained lawyer (which I am obviously not) the letter appears to be a standardized, boilerplate governmental communication, rather than the arguably inflammatory language I chose.

Mea Culpa.

[William Kelly]

Two issues have recently surfaced regarding my erroneous interpretations of material referenced in the book:

First, I must acknowledge an error which I had been warned about by Larry Hancock during his review of a copy of the manuscript several months ago. The misunderstanding was completely my own and was due to my assumption of the veracity of Robert D. Morrow's account of reading a document which he alleged Johnson had hand-written to Gen. Charles Cabell shortly after the Bay of Pigs incident, warning of Kennedy's pending plan to break-up the CIA (at p. 125). Larry had flagged the issue of Morrow's general credibility at that time, and I did delete other material from the book which I thought he had embellished (or simply made up), such as the purported flight with David Ferrie into, and then from, Cuba in the middle of the Bay of Pigs invasion.

I clearly deluded myself with the notion that his prevarications related only to the numerous instances of his self-aggrandizing stories, not the more general material such as LBJ's alleged letter.

Evidently, the publisher and author took certain liberties with categorizing the book as "non-fiction."

.....................

Larry furnished the following comments which explain a little of Morrow's background:

"The basic scoop on Morrow is that he heard some rumors that convinced him there was a conspiracy - the rumors involved both an associate of Bobby Baker (Mickey Weiner) and a couple of intelligence officers (INTEL 1 and INTEL 2), one of whom was a personal military aide to Lyndon Johnson in 1963 (Howard Burris). Morrow decided to press his conspiracy views during the Church committee hearings, approaching at least one congressman and persuading him that there should be an investigation. It is fair to say that Morrow's effort did help stimulate some early interest in what became the HSCA. The problem was that, at the time, Morrow had no direct information or evidence about a conspiracy and while he had certainly worked for Kohley on a Cuban counterfeiting scheme, there was no evidence that it was a CIA sponsored project (Details of that are available in the testimony offered in the counterfeiting trial).

"It appears that Morrow, possibly in frustration, decided to start writing books to focus attention on a conspiracy, and the more books he wrote the wilder his stories got. He admitted privately that he was making things up to gain attention since that would help bring pressure for an investigation. At the core of things he believed there was a conspiracy but since he could not crack it, anything was fair game. There are a couple of true and important things in his books: Weiner and his Baker connections, Intell 1 (Burris), both are key pieces of gossip. But beyond that, there is simply no evidence to support any contact between Morrow and high level CIA officers or his involvement in CIA Cuban operations."

.............

As was the case with the other "disinformation" I fell for (regarding the McCone-Rowley memorandum noted previously) the reference was redundant to other material making the same point. Both were clearly attempts to reach a bit too far to reinforce points already made; in this case, that Lyndon Johnson had created his own "back channel" network to both the military and intelligence communities, in addition to the FBI, at the highest levels.

Unfortunately, the error was repeated on pages 177-178. In the context of the narrative on those pages, some of the same information was corroborated by Evelyn Lincoln, Kenneth O"Donnell and Horace Busby (p. 89), though not the issue of Johnson's Secret Service mole within the White House. That is open to debate since there is no other credible reference to support such an assertion.

Mea Culpa.

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

I have also been told by Douglas Caddy, the attorney for Billie Sol Estes in 1984, that this sentence (p. 296) is incorrect: "The Department of Justice responded with a letter which took on a very adversarial tone, essentially threatening to take aggressive action toward Mr. Estes if he didn't drop the case for good." I should have inserted the qualifier "in my opinion" because it was the way I might have read that letter if I were in the position of possibly putting myself in legal jeopardy for any errors or mistakes I might make versus the alternative of walking away and just keeping my mouth shut. Mr. Caddy advised me of the following:

"Edward Miller, a former top official with the FBI, at my request arranged for me, along with Miller, to visit with Stephen Trott about Billie Sol Estes' desire to tell what he knew. Trott could not have been more cooperative in laying the legal groundwork for Estes' to make full disclosure. Trott's letter was a standard U.S. Department of Justice communication used under such circumstances. Miller and I met twice with Trott. On the latter occasion he arranged for three FBI agents, who had been assigned to read the FBI files on Estes and on the Kennedy assassination, to fly the next day to Abilene to interview Estes. At that meeting, attended by Estes, his daughter, Pam, and myself, Estes suddenly declared he would not talk -- period. The FBI agents, who had remained in their hotel rooms awaiting a call from me to join the meeting with Estes, then flew back to Washington the same day.

"I put many months of work into this matter at Estes' request in preparation of his obtaining a grant from the Moody Foundation whose trustee, Shearn Moody, had agreed to fund after Estes' approached him while Estes was still in prison. The proposed historical grant was for Estes' to tell what he knew. At that time I was administering several grants from the Moody Foundation in which Shearn Moody was specifically interested. When Estes' backed down at the Abilene meeting, the prospect of a grant from the Moody Foundation ended.

"Why Estes' backed out has remained a mystery. U.S. Marshal Clint Peoples told me afterwards that he thought Estes' backed out because one of his family members might have ended up being implicated in the dealings with LBJ had the disclosure project proceeded."

Regardless of his mysterious reasons for "clamming up" at that late juncture, he did shut up for over two decades. At that time, he lent his support to the work of a French investigative reporter, William Reymond, who eventually produced both a book and a video presenting the Johnson/Carter/Wallace conspiracy story in considerable detail, with corroboration from individuals (including Kyle Brown, a former associate of both Carter and Estes) who had heard Carter describing the conspiracy on tape as well as in person. Unfortunately, this long awaited confirmation was undermined by the later release of a book under Estes' own name which presented a much larger conspiracy scenario and recanted on some points which he had related to Caddy, the Justice Department and Reymond. As Larry Hancock noted to me, the Estes book and the material in it left many researchers, who had been deeply involved investigating the Johnson/Carter/Wallace conspiracy very much "up in the air". Despite contacts with Estes himself, no resolution was ever obtained with the issues created by the appearance of his book.

The reason for Estes's sudden recantation of his 1984 testimony—and the story he authorized in Reymond's book and video—is open for speculation, but threats from someone against himself (then 82 years old) or one of his family members is but one possibility.

The bottom line, with respect to the sentence I referenced above, should have at the very least carried a qualifier, or better yet, a statement that to a trained lawyer (which I am obviously not) the letter appears to be a standardized, boilerplate governmental communication, rather than the arguably inflammatory language I chose.

Mea Culpa.

Hey Phil,

At least you recognize your mistakes and corect them, when many authors are too sturborn to acknowledge mistakes and try to defend them.

I look forward to reading your book.

BK